"All of humanity needs President Bush to show more committment to reducing GHGs," said Brazilian Environment Minister Marina Silva
Ohio State University researchers said the Qori Kalis glacier in the Andes is retreating at a rate of 200 feet per year over the past 10 years. In the previous decade it retreated at a rate of 20 feet per year. OSU researcher Lonnie Thompson said, "The widespread retreat of mountain glaciers may be our clearest evidence of global warming as this integrates many climate variables."
Extreme weather conditions caused by global warming are likely to aggravate the loss situation that led to $230 billion claimed in damages in 2005, insurer Swiss Re said in early March.
Take Me Back Tuesday: GLOBAL WARMING CORRAL
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
Still waiting on you to post the historical data......oh wait that's right you can't. We don't have historical data for the past few million years. All this is based on a very short period of time in the grand scheme of things. A few hundred years of data is a small blip on the chart when it comes to long term averages and trends. So what if the past couple of decades have been a little warmer. I'd still tend to think it was natural.
Were all the industries back in the day as "green" as they are now? No. No pollution controls for a long time. So I'm sure the amount of pollution before regulations was probably still greater than the rate today or at least equal. So another reason it probably has no bearing on today's weather.
Long live the hole in the ozone!
Were all the industries back in the day as "green" as they are now? No. No pollution controls for a long time. So I'm sure the amount of pollution before regulations was probably still greater than the rate today or at least equal. So another reason it probably has no bearing on today's weather.
Long live the hole in the ozone!
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
Variations of the Earth’s surface temperature over the last 140 years and the last millennium.
(a) The Earth’s surface temperature is shown year by year (red bars) and approximately decade by decade (black line, a filtered annual curve suppressing fluctuations below near decadal
time-scales). There are uncertainties in the annual data (thin black whisker bars represent the 95% confidence range) due to data gaps, random instrumental errors and uncertainties, uncertainties in bias corrections in the ocean surface temperature data and also in adjustments for urbanisation over the land. Over both the last 140 years and 100 years, the best estimate is that the global average surface temperature has increased by 0.6 ± 0.2°C.
(b) Additionally, the year by year (blue curve) and 50 year average (black curve) variations of the average surface temperature of the Northern Hemisphere for the past 1000 years have been reconstructed from “proxy†data calibrated against thermometer data (see list of the main proxy data in the diagram). The 95% confidence range in the annual data is represented by the grey region. These uncertainties increase in more distant times and are always much larger than in the instrumental record due to the use of relatively sparse proxy data. Nevertheless the rate and duration of warming of the 20th century has been much greater than in any of the previous nine centuries. Similarly, it is likely that the 1990s have been the warmest decade and 1998 the warmest year of the millennium.
(a) The Earth’s surface temperature is shown year by year (red bars) and approximately decade by decade (black line, a filtered annual curve suppressing fluctuations below near decadal
time-scales). There are uncertainties in the annual data (thin black whisker bars represent the 95% confidence range) due to data gaps, random instrumental errors and uncertainties, uncertainties in bias corrections in the ocean surface temperature data and also in adjustments for urbanisation over the land. Over both the last 140 years and 100 years, the best estimate is that the global average surface temperature has increased by 0.6 ± 0.2°C.
(b) Additionally, the year by year (blue curve) and 50 year average (black curve) variations of the average surface temperature of the Northern Hemisphere for the past 1000 years have been reconstructed from “proxy†data calibrated against thermometer data (see list of the main proxy data in the diagram). The 95% confidence range in the annual data is represented by the grey region. These uncertainties increase in more distant times and are always much larger than in the instrumental record due to the use of relatively sparse proxy data. Nevertheless the rate and duration of warming of the 20th century has been much greater than in any of the previous nine centuries. Similarly, it is likely that the 1990s have been the warmest decade and 1998 the warmest year of the millennium.
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
Hammer wrote:Variations of the Earth’s surface temperature over the last 140 years and the last millennium.
(a) The Earth’s surface temperature is shown year by year (red bars) and approximately decade by decade (black line, a filtered annual curve suppressing fluctuations below near decadal
time-scales). There are uncertainties in the annual data (thin black whisker bars represent the 95% confidence range) due to data gaps, random instrumental errors and uncertainties, uncertainties in bias corrections in the ocean surface temperature data and also in adjustments for urbanisation over the land. Over both the last 140 years and 100 years, the best estimate is that the global average surface temperature has increased by 0.6 ± 0.2°C.
(b) Additionally, the year by year (blue curve) and 50 year average (black curve) variations of the average surface temperature of the Northern Hemisphere for the past 1000 years have been reconstructed from “proxy†data calibrated against thermometer data (see list of the main proxy data in the diagram). The 95% confidence range in the annual data is represented by the grey region. These uncertainties increase in more distant times and are always much larger than in the instrumental record due to the use of relatively sparse proxy data. Nevertheless the rate and duration of warming of the 20th century has been much greater than in any of the previous nine centuries. Similarly, it is likely that the 1990s have been the warmest decade and 1998 the warmest year of the millennium.
An increase of 0.6 degrees in the last 140 years. That's 0.0043 degree increase average. So it should take about another 150 years to raise another 0.6 whatever degrees.
1998 was the hottest year in the past 1000 years??? So the last 9 years have been cooler??? Doesn't sound like a warming trend to me and definitely nothing to get your drawers in a bunch over. It doesn't sound like our CO2 producing habits are having much of an impact. Again I say our awful CO2 emissions are just a tiny tiny factor in the overall equation.
I think you need to speak to the devil about it. He's the one cranking up the temps down below.
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
At least some "scientists" are not jumping on the bandwagon.
The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
By Michael Leidig and Roya Nikkhah
Last Updated: 11:15pm BST 17/07/2004
Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research.
A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes.
Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures.
advertisement
"The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently - in the last 100 to 150 years."
Dr Solanki said that the brighter Sun and higher levels of "greenhouse gases", such as carbon dioxide, both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact.
Average global temperatures have increased by about 0.2 deg Celsius over the past 20 years and are widely believed to be responsible for new extremes in weather patterns. After pressure from environmentalists, politicians agreed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, promising to limit greenhouse gas emissions between 2008 and 2012. Britain ratified the protocol in 2002 and said it would cut emissions by 12.5 per cent from 1990 levels.
Globally, 1997, 1998 and 2002 were the hottest years since worldwide weather records were first collated in 1860.
Most scientists agree that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels have contributed to the warming of the planet in the past few decades but have questioned whether a brighter Sun is also responsible for rising temperatures.
To determine the Sun's role in global warming, Dr Solanki's research team measured magnetic zones on the Sun's surface known as sunspots, which are believed to intensify the Sun's energy output.
The team studied sunspot data going back several hundred years. They found that a dearth of sunspots signalled a cold period - which could last up to 50 years - but that over the past century their numbers had increased as the Earth's climate grew steadily warmer. The scientists also compared data from ice samples collected during an expedition to Greenland in 1991. The most recent samples contained the lowest recorded levels of beryllium 10 for more than 1,000 years. Beryllium 10 is a particle created by cosmic rays that decreases in the Earth's atmosphere as the magnetic energy from the Sun increases. Scientists can currently trace beryllium 10 levels back 1,150 years.
Dr Solanki does not know what is causing the Sun to burn brighter now or how long this cycle would last.
He says that the increased solar brightness over the past 20 years has not been enough to cause the observed climate changes but believes that the impact of more intense sunshine on the ozone layer and on cloud cover could be affecting the climate more than the sunlight itself.
Dr Bill Burrows, a climatologist and a member of the Royal Meteorological Society, welcomed Dr Solanki's research. "While the established view remains that the sun cannot be responsible for all the climate changes we have seen in the past 50 years or so, this study is certainly significant," he said.
"It shows that there is enough happening on the solar front to merit further research. Perhaps we are devoting too many resources to correcting human effects on the climate without being sure that we are the major contributor."
Dr David Viner, the senior research scientist at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit, said the research showed that the sun did have an effect on global warming.
He added, however, that the study also showed that over the past 20 years the number of sunspots had remained roughly constant, while the Earth's temperature had continued to increase.
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said.
Dr Gareth Jones, a climate researcher at the Met Office, said that Dr Solanki's findings were inconclusive because the study had not incorporated other potential climate change factors.
"The Sun's radiance may well have an impact on climate change but it needs to be looked at in conjunction with other factors such as greenhouse gases, sulphate aerosols and volcano activity," he said. The research adds weight to the views of David Bellamy, the conservationist. "Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth," he said. "I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy-makers are not.
"Instead, they have an unshakeable faith in what has, unfortunately, become one of the central credos of the environmental movement: humans burn fossil fuels, which release increased levels of carbon dioxide - the principal so-called greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock."
Link to Article
The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
By Michael Leidig and Roya Nikkhah
Last Updated: 11:15pm BST 17/07/2004
Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research.
A study by Swiss and German scientists suggests that increasing radiation from the sun is responsible for recent global climate changes.
Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures.
advertisement
"The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently - in the last 100 to 150 years."
Dr Solanki said that the brighter Sun and higher levels of "greenhouse gases", such as carbon dioxide, both contributed to the change in the Earth's temperature but it was impossible to say which had the greater impact.
Average global temperatures have increased by about 0.2 deg Celsius over the past 20 years and are widely believed to be responsible for new extremes in weather patterns. After pressure from environmentalists, politicians agreed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, promising to limit greenhouse gas emissions between 2008 and 2012. Britain ratified the protocol in 2002 and said it would cut emissions by 12.5 per cent from 1990 levels.
Globally, 1997, 1998 and 2002 were the hottest years since worldwide weather records were first collated in 1860.
Most scientists agree that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels have contributed to the warming of the planet in the past few decades but have questioned whether a brighter Sun is also responsible for rising temperatures.
To determine the Sun's role in global warming, Dr Solanki's research team measured magnetic zones on the Sun's surface known as sunspots, which are believed to intensify the Sun's energy output.
The team studied sunspot data going back several hundred years. They found that a dearth of sunspots signalled a cold period - which could last up to 50 years - but that over the past century their numbers had increased as the Earth's climate grew steadily warmer. The scientists also compared data from ice samples collected during an expedition to Greenland in 1991. The most recent samples contained the lowest recorded levels of beryllium 10 for more than 1,000 years. Beryllium 10 is a particle created by cosmic rays that decreases in the Earth's atmosphere as the magnetic energy from the Sun increases. Scientists can currently trace beryllium 10 levels back 1,150 years.
Dr Solanki does not know what is causing the Sun to burn brighter now or how long this cycle would last.
He says that the increased solar brightness over the past 20 years has not been enough to cause the observed climate changes but believes that the impact of more intense sunshine on the ozone layer and on cloud cover could be affecting the climate more than the sunlight itself.
Dr Bill Burrows, a climatologist and a member of the Royal Meteorological Society, welcomed Dr Solanki's research. "While the established view remains that the sun cannot be responsible for all the climate changes we have seen in the past 50 years or so, this study is certainly significant," he said.
"It shows that there is enough happening on the solar front to merit further research. Perhaps we are devoting too many resources to correcting human effects on the climate without being sure that we are the major contributor."
Dr David Viner, the senior research scientist at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit, said the research showed that the sun did have an effect on global warming.
He added, however, that the study also showed that over the past 20 years the number of sunspots had remained roughly constant, while the Earth's temperature had continued to increase.
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said.
Dr Gareth Jones, a climate researcher at the Met Office, said that Dr Solanki's findings were inconclusive because the study had not incorporated other potential climate change factors.
"The Sun's radiance may well have an impact on climate change but it needs to be looked at in conjunction with other factors such as greenhouse gases, sulphate aerosols and volcano activity," he said. The research adds weight to the views of David Bellamy, the conservationist. "Global warming - at least the modern nightmare version - is a myth," he said. "I am sure of it and so are a growing number of scientists. But what is really worrying is that the world's politicians and policy-makers are not.
"Instead, they have an unshakeable faith in what has, unfortunately, become one of the central credos of the environmental movement: humans burn fossil fuels, which release increased levels of carbon dioxide - the principal so-called greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock."
Link to Article
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
More support for the Sun hypothesis:
Sci/Tech
Global warming - is the Sun to blame?
More research is called for to determine the Sun's effect on climate change
By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse
Global warming may not be caused by humanity's fossil fuel emissions, but could be due to changes in the Sun.
Research suggests that the magnetic flux from the Sun more than doubled this century. As solar magnetism is closely linked with sunspot activity and the strength of sunlight reaching Earth, the increase could have produced warming in the global climate.
Prof. Mike Lockwood: "The man made greenhouse gases is accelerating as time goes by"
The evidence for an increasingly energetic Sun comes from a new analysis of the magnetic field between the planets, carried out by scientists at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, near Oxford, UK.
Solar Wind
This magnetic field is caused by the Solar Wind, a stream of particles given off by the Sun which fills the solar system.
The scientists produce evidence that since 1964 the interplanetary magnetic field has increased in strength by 40%.
Evidence from before the space age suggests that the magnetic field is 2.3 times stronger than it was in 1901.
Scientists do not doubt that the increased magnetic field results from a more energetic Sun. Their problem is that the effect of these increases on the Earth is unknown.
Not our fault?
The research is published in Nature and in the same journal Professor Eugene Parker, of the Laboratory for Astrophysics and Space Research, University of Chicago, comments that it could explain global warming.
He notes that the increased solar activity has occurred in parallel with an increase in carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere. And it may not be a coincidence, he says.
Professor Parker suggests that the Sun's increased activity caused the Earth's global temperature to rise and that in turn warmed the oceans.
Warmer oceans absorb less carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. So a warmer Earth has more of the so-called greenhouse gases. Humanity's burning of fossil fuels may therefore not be the cause of global warming.
Perilous plans
Professor Parker adds that that more research must be done about the Sun's role in global warming before drastic action is taken here on Earth.
"It is essential to check to what extent the facts support these conclusions before embarking on drastic, perilous and perhaps misguided plans for global action," he says.
Measurements of the magnetic field are not the only evidence for the Sun's variable influence on the Earth. The planet went through a "little ice age" during the 17th Century, at a time when very few sunspots appeared on the surface of the Sun.
And the so-called "medieval maximum" was a period of warmer than average global weather in the 12th Century. Astronomers believe that the Sun was slightly brighter at that time.
Link to Article
Both of these articles are suggesting that enough research has yet to be done. The amount of CO2 in the air my not be influenced by humans much if any. Again like everyone else has said there is just not enough evidence to point fingers in one direction as to the cause of this overall very slight average increase in temperature.
And also it could be completely out of our control as nature was intended to be. We've always been at the mercy of the weather. What gives us the right to try and manipulate it and throw nature of its course? Oh wait I know.....the chance for apocalyptic theorists to scare people out of money.
Sci/Tech
Global warming - is the Sun to blame?
More research is called for to determine the Sun's effect on climate change
By BBC News Online Science Editor Dr David Whitehouse
Global warming may not be caused by humanity's fossil fuel emissions, but could be due to changes in the Sun.
Research suggests that the magnetic flux from the Sun more than doubled this century. As solar magnetism is closely linked with sunspot activity and the strength of sunlight reaching Earth, the increase could have produced warming in the global climate.
Prof. Mike Lockwood: "The man made greenhouse gases is accelerating as time goes by"
The evidence for an increasingly energetic Sun comes from a new analysis of the magnetic field between the planets, carried out by scientists at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, near Oxford, UK.
Solar Wind
This magnetic field is caused by the Solar Wind, a stream of particles given off by the Sun which fills the solar system.
The scientists produce evidence that since 1964 the interplanetary magnetic field has increased in strength by 40%.
Evidence from before the space age suggests that the magnetic field is 2.3 times stronger than it was in 1901.
Scientists do not doubt that the increased magnetic field results from a more energetic Sun. Their problem is that the effect of these increases on the Earth is unknown.
Not our fault?
The research is published in Nature and in the same journal Professor Eugene Parker, of the Laboratory for Astrophysics and Space Research, University of Chicago, comments that it could explain global warming.
He notes that the increased solar activity has occurred in parallel with an increase in carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere. And it may not be a coincidence, he says.
Professor Parker suggests that the Sun's increased activity caused the Earth's global temperature to rise and that in turn warmed the oceans.
Warmer oceans absorb less carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. So a warmer Earth has more of the so-called greenhouse gases. Humanity's burning of fossil fuels may therefore not be the cause of global warming.
Perilous plans
Professor Parker adds that that more research must be done about the Sun's role in global warming before drastic action is taken here on Earth.
"It is essential to check to what extent the facts support these conclusions before embarking on drastic, perilous and perhaps misguided plans for global action," he says.
Measurements of the magnetic field are not the only evidence for the Sun's variable influence on the Earth. The planet went through a "little ice age" during the 17th Century, at a time when very few sunspots appeared on the surface of the Sun.
And the so-called "medieval maximum" was a period of warmer than average global weather in the 12th Century. Astronomers believe that the Sun was slightly brighter at that time.
Link to Article
Both of these articles are suggesting that enough research has yet to be done. The amount of CO2 in the air my not be influenced by humans much if any. Again like everyone else has said there is just not enough evidence to point fingers in one direction as to the cause of this overall very slight average increase in temperature.
And also it could be completely out of our control as nature was intended to be. We've always been at the mercy of the weather. What gives us the right to try and manipulate it and throw nature of its course? Oh wait I know.....the chance for apocalyptic theorists to scare people out of money.
Last edited by rjohnson on Mon Apr 30, 2007 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
-
Super Black Eagle
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 2474
- Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 8:06 am
- Location: Hernando --- Mussacuna Creek
Most scientists agree that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels have contributed to the warming of the planet in the past few decades but have questioned whether a brighter Sun is also responsible for rising temperatures.
Dr David Viner, the senior research scientist at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit, said the research showed that the sun did have an effect on global warming.
He added, however, that the study also showed that over the past 20 years the number of sunspots had remained roughly constant, while the Earth's temperature had continued to increase.
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said
Dr David Viner, the senior research scientist at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit, said the research showed that the sun did have an effect on global warming.
He added, however, that the study also showed that over the past 20 years the number of sunspots had remained roughly constant, while the Earth's temperature had continued to increase.
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said
-
Bullreds & Greenheads
- Veteran
- Posts: 306
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 12:50 am
- Location: Near Ole Ross's Rez
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
Hammer wrote:Most scientists agree that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels have contributed to the warming of the planet in the past few decades but have questioned whether a brighter Sun is also responsible for rising temperatures.
Dr David Viner, the senior research scientist at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit, said the research showed that the sun did have an effect on global warming.
He added, however, that the study also showed that over the past 20 years the number of sunspots had remained roughly constant, while the Earth's temperature had continued to increase.
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said
Again it doesn't say that they are even major factors. There are so many variables in place that affect climate that it is really ridiculous to try and pinpoint on thing. The science still isn't there to prove anyone's theory correct. There is no way to measure the amount of influence CO2 emissions really has.
But do you acknowledge yet that CO2 is not the primary factor influencing the temperature? It's the sun's fault. Solar Warming is the new trend. I would still think that the source of heat for planet Earth would by far be the greatest influence. Alright who's on the Solar Warming bandwagon??? Let's start giving companies tax breaks in the form of solar credits so they don't feel guilty for not using solar power.
You also failed to acknowledge the parts where they were saying more research needed to be done in order figure out where to put the funding. It's just apocolyptic hysteria driven by scientists and investors looking to get funding and pad their pockets. And so what if we did cut the emissions. What difference is 0.06 degree lower temperature going to make anyway?? Lot of hoopla over a marginal increase in temperature.
Long live the hole in the ozone! Long live Global Warming! Long live (insert latest crazy money driven hypothesis)!
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
This suggested that over the past 20 years, human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation had begun to dominate "the natural factors involved in climate change", he said
HUMAN ACTIVITIES HAVE BEGUN TO DOMINATE NATURAL FACTORS- LAST TIME I CHECKED, THE SUN IS A NATURAL FACTOR SINCE WE CANT CONTROL THE SUN, IT IS EVEN MORE CRITICAL THAT WE CONTROL THE THINGS WE CAN
HUMAN ACTIVITIES HAVE BEGUN TO DOMINATE NATURAL FACTORS- LAST TIME I CHECKED, THE SUN IS A NATURAL FACTOR SINCE WE CANT CONTROL THE SUN, IT IS EVEN MORE CRITICAL THAT WE CONTROL THE THINGS WE CAN
-
rjohnson
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 4895
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:28 am
- Location: Brandon, MS
- Contact:
Still can't say that this domination is in fact a large enough factor to cause any changes.
http://www.lithicIT.com My biz
-
JJ McGuire
- Veteran
- Posts: 282
- Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 5:26 am
- Location: Chester Springs, PA
- Contact:
-
Ducks be us
- Duck South Addict
- Posts: 3022
- Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:03 pm
- Location: Horn Lake,Mississippi
Putt, putt, putt...I have a rubber butt...everytime I turn around....It goes " putt putt" 
At this point in time...Im more concerned about some rag head with a dirty bomb, or, some kinda biological terrorists than global warming. The earth has been coming out of an ice age for millions of years...It'll keep coming until the next ice age I reckon
At this point in time...Im more concerned about some rag head with a dirty bomb, or, some kinda biological terrorists than global warming. The earth has been coming out of an ice age for millions of years...It'll keep coming until the next ice age I reckon
"You get what you put in and people get what they deserve..." Hank Jr. and Kid Rock
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests