11.27.07
im read Wikipedia on the Opium Wars one interesting point i found is that India is the main production base of
pilgrim` no the CFC patent issue has nothing to do with it.. BEACAUSE the primary replacment for CFC-12 was 25 years OLDER than CFC-12 is
can anyone tell me what this is a picture of? http://www.ap.org/media/demo_images/photo6.jpg
its rate of change was negative already in 1750
looks like some muslim men in white robs running with torches
pilgrim` so it’s patent had already run out before CFC-12’s
People, with torches, running.
so we already had global warming before 1750.. yee
The argument is that we’ve made it melt faster.
Glaciars started melting during the last ice age, others have formed since the last ice age, some are forming today..
kobushi’s right on that… it’s ‘replacement’ was going back to an older compound
astro-well DUH but WHY are they doing it?
But I have work to do.. And i need to get to it. later
Party time?
rather strange to make such an arguemnet based upon only 2 photographs.
yes, we have gone over this. There is a natural cooling/warming cycle that the earth has. There is evidence to support the fact that CO2 levels and teperatures are rising beyond the normal levels that we have observed from the past
but I agree, we did make it melt fastre. So did a butterfly in china. the question is.. by how MUCH
Like I said, the glacer studies are weak, imo, because there’s also an ending ice age to take into account.
KoBushi oh so…it had no relationship? the fact that CFC-12 is cheaper to produce, non flamable, not a chemical polutant to waters, and non caustic?
that is totally factually wrong.. Co2 levels and temperatures are far far below than many times in the past 
right, which is why I asked OS about it 
CO2 levels are the highest they’ve been in ~600,000 years.
fine, 3 billions years ago I’m sure there was probly more CO2 in the atmosphere
Co2 has very little effect on warming or we would be warming now faster than we did prior to the 1940s and we are not.
Lupine - That’s not true at all, what the hell are you talking about?
C02 is at an extremely high level
I always wondered about thiose canon Capt Hammilton had drawn by horses across the frozen riveres of NY in the 1770s
and there is no concurrent change in temperature to associate with it.
Lupine - we can do without the straight-out-of-your-ass commentary.
They’re made of foam?
Its fractional
rivers that even int he record winter of 1944 did not freeeze over since
yes, let’s just ignore all the C02 data frm the Vostok ice core samples
Revanche be polite.
you are a total noob here, and you obviously have no idea of what has occured here.
but then as I said, no grant money is on this for me
Co2 has very little effect on warming or we would be warming now faster than we did prior to the 1940s and we are not. — The computer models suggest otherwise. CO2 is known to trap heat, and this has been observed repeatedly.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ read that it explains a lot
Computer models are just that.. computer models.
The computer models could be completely wrong
methane
_measurement data_ seems to show that C02 levels POSTDATE temperature rise by ~ 800 years.
look up methane effects look up methane levels
measurement data trumps models every time.
I have seen people who enter data into the models admit that they have no idea if they will be accurate
pilgrim` the primary CFC refrigerant, R12, was replaced primarily with R134a… R134a was patented 25 years PRIOR to R12
“but it has a higher number!”
pilgrim` so your argument over a patent issue is invalid, because the primary replacement had been out of patent for even longer
FreeTrade, yup and the assumptions of the programers are suspect most of the time.
KoBushi I know that… but till 12 ran out, 3M made one mondo BUNDLE
FreeTrade - this is a refutation of “The Inconvenient Truth,” but out of curiosity, have you seen the film yourself?
pilgrim` they still make an assload of money on R134a
Our simple script is logarithmic (remember our example of adding more shades over a window) but does not allow for complete saturation of radiative wavelengths, likely increases in evapo-transpirative cooling, increases in albedo (bright clouds reflecting more incoming solar radiation) nor any variation by latitude and so will progressively overestimate potential warming from CO2 alone. No matter, it does quite well enough to dem increases in albedo (bright clouds reflecting more incoming solar radiation) nor any variation by latitude and so will progressively overestimate potential warming from CO2 alone. No matter, it does quite well enough to demonstrate the principle.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/vostok.icecore.co2
Revanche I prefer to gather my data form peer reviewed scientific journals. Not from someone who has himself, a complete disregard for the global enviroment.
pilgrim` there are only a handful of companies that manufacturer refrigerants for use in the US
KoBushi would the case of freon I have purchased some 30 years back be illegal these days?
there is a nice chart of it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vostok-ice-core-petit.png
You can see how much this little script has overshot the mark since Lindzen states explicitly that a doubling from 300ppmv to 600ppmv of atmospheric carbon dioxide would result in only 0.5 °C warming. Rather obviously, Lindzen’s calculations do not suggest a particularly large greenhouse influence on post-Industrial Revolution temperatures and, significantly, this does not include clouds, so CO2 would really only be a fraction of the total effect shown I can go on forever but I wont read
Lupine - Every fact in An Inconvenient Truth is cited and sourcable to peer-reviewed papers.
The Vostok cores don’t include current conditions.
read both sides of the debate
pilgrim` if it’s a CFC, and you aren’t liceansed to use it, yes it would be illegal to use it, or transport it
read a lot
The NDP has just demanded a federal $10 minumum wage. wtf
up to $10,000 fine for non-liceansed use of it
you will find there is no consensus accept politically and even there there isnt true consenssus
NDP?
the movie has not been peer reviewed by a respected sceintific journal.
the russians admit they signed on to kyoto to sell pollution credits for profit which they do to Spain
FreeTrade - you mean accept for the clear concensus of the world’s leading scientific bodies.
But, there is no patent motivation pilgrim`, there was nothing to be gained in relation to the patent exipring
JUNKSCIENCE.COM
Spain pays millions of dollars to Russia to buy pollution credits
Administrative Contact: Services, Domain dns@wlcg.com Westlake Consulting Group 529 14th St. NW Suite 545 Washington, DC 20045
and I go by the actual raw sceintific data. You may choose to ignore it.
hmmm politcally based? =x
because of the crazy formulat they use for countries
Heh.
oldschool - nice.
owned
“Trapping heat” implies that the energy is stuck in the system forever — this is a false notion.
Global warming .. what a money maker.
god that’s ignorant.
That doesnt mean shit who owns it. The science is real or it isnt
wow, you just shit canned the entire branch of geoscience.. because THEY often use “trapping heat”
and Ihave seen scientists at UVA and MIT (Recently) Say similar things
FreeTrade - Have you seen “An Inconvenient Truth” ?
I believe in Global Climate Change!!!
And they have no financial stake in their opinions nor do we know if these people do.. And even if they did which we dont know, the measure of their claims is the claim not who finances the claims
Revanche so then tell us, how would you describe the way a greenhouse works?
This site has been around many years and for all we know they could be hosting the domain.
In my faith, Global Climate Change = Mother Nature doing things that is beyond my control, and I have to adapt or die. In my faith, Global Climate Change = Mother Nature doing things that is beyond my control, and I have to adapt or die.
No I refuse to see a science film which was prejudiced toward a known outcome by a politician. I only research and study the views of scientists and 100s of them from all walks of life who have expertise in this area of science.
I will say, that the model based research on global warming is crap.
FreeTrade - if you refuse to watch it, how can you OBJECTIVELY recieve a refutation of it? you won’t even hear both sides.
you would be surprised the people who have no credentials in this area of science who have drawn conclusions based on it.
i’m read Wikipedia on the Opium Wars. one interesting point i found is that India is the main production base of opium. India and China are two very comparable nations: what was India’s then policy in consuming opium? why weren’t India’s own people affected by the negative effects of opium?
And the fact that any of us here would draw conclusions on science I doubt any of us understand well, is absurd which is why I have drawn no conclusions.
it has not been peer reviewed by a respected scientific panel.. and hence, is does not constitute as “evidence” in any scientific discussion.”
The action of inaction.
I continue to read the science and wherever it takes me is where it will go I dont have a dog in this fight
Revanche, do we force critics to watch Gore rant about Global warming, so they can comment on the science or facts on which the film is based on?
hell lots of indians in that time smoked or ate opium still do
I dont have a reason to believe in or not believe in man made causes of global warming.
but it was indigenous
I just happen to know that noone knows I do know that much
so it wasn’t a trade product
I know only that people have opinions on it
Revanche, I don’t think so.
And that the opinions scientifically are very different
Global Warming has a political motivation behind it, whether it is industrial business or enviromental activism. Pick a side I suppose … but that is just my humble opinion
yeah nuclear energy was also a politically motivated topic till 1945
Some Russian scientists did a friendly bet with some British scientists that the cause of warming was completely solar and it would slow down within or change in a number of years. And in 15 years or so we will see if they are right.
dc|web, but global climate change is happening even if you do not believe in it.
People trying to seperate it as non-political have a hard time in doing so
america banned opium importation in early 20th century. so china did no more than what america would do.
It’s not just _all about the science_
What effect will clouds have on surface temperatures if global climate changes in the next century? No one knows. So why can’t we model clouds? The biggest problem is that clouds are almost explosive in nature when compared to the rest of the climate system. Cumulus clouds can form in seconds to minutes, and the entire life cycle of a massive thunderstorm can be measured in hours. This thunderstorm cloud may only cover 20 to 50 miles of the Earth’s surface, while our best global climate models on the world’s fastest supercomputers can only track a sing
dc|web, no way.. mother nature and creation has done it’s thing long before we got here or started keeping track of it.
http://terra.nasa.gov/FactSheets/EnergyBalance/
china was annoyed cause the brits had ports on their coast in which they could import this addictive drug
It looks like junkscience.com is supported in part by readers.
anyways, i gotta go.. interesting read
and a politcal consulintg group out of DC =x odd
And remember you can alleged that scientists on all sides of this issue have ulterior motives and some may
all the “treaty ports” were annoying to china
Fine. But there is still political motivation behind either it being _real_ or _not_
but clearly they dont all
well, you can judge it when they pass beyond the realm of objective science
although one good thing that came from it was the german “ching-tao” beer
Those that refuse global warming’s existance have a political motivation in doing so, those that claim its existance do as well It’s political
and clearly not all scientists are for sale by either side, I would expect most to be true to their science perhaps biased but very few that would be intentionally fraudulent, its more likely scientists with thier OWN Ulterior motives might exagerate it because our lack of knowlege is greater than our knowlege which would suggest to be careful about making sweeping pronouncements..
yes/no. there still has been very little actual/real world measurements on the global temperature.. let alone an agreement on what the “global temperture” is.
Or sweeping conclusions.
we have large amounts of data on localized trends.. but how do you “average” that over the globe?
dc|web, no mother nature is not political. I try and hear both sides. It is aways a good thing to go to a technology that has a small environmental foot print. But it is also true that we have to live and make money.
the idea of “global warming”, or “climate change do to man’s increasing use of fossil fuels and other chemicals” is not political
What we really are dealing with are 1000s of hypothesis by different scientists who dont are going differnet directions in their research.. bottom line
but some people have politicized it for their own purposes
The idea? No. The discussion? Yes
in the 1970s fluoro-chloro-carbons were banned
How one takes a few data points, and attempts to extrapolate it to the average of a massive, highly chaotic system.. is well.. an interesting realmn of chaos theory
trapezoid, arrg, climate change will happen even if man is not in the equation. Which is what most against Global warming are saying.
if that is the right term like “freon” and the propellant in aerosol cans
chloro-fluoro-carbons = CFSs
close
the US was a leader in doing so
err CFC’s
thanks doug
chloroflourocarbons
So keep studying folks, dont give up, dont stop, continue to be educated but also be skeptical. dont accept peoples word, see what scientists say who disagree. examine their work and their explanation, And in some cases use common sense… CO2 is at a historic high (Maybe one of more highs) and we arent burning up and in fact the temperature apparently rose faster prior to 1940 than since 1940
but the idea of an international conference at kyoto sort of annoyed some people at high levels of government due to their own personal political beliefs not because they were that educated about the science of the topic
You could debate that too by suggesting means of measuring temperature change were too sloppy and too subject to error.
certainly there is no harm done in studying possible climate change……
you can debate every aspect of this thing ad infinitum the problem is my time isnt infinitum I have work to do
Global warming movent = Man chaning envirnment. Mother nature is not allowed in the equation.
the ice caps are melting
well man is part of nature
The NDP has just demanded a federal $10 minumum wage. Which is fucked in the head
so in the end it is natural anyway
which should result in lower sea levels more beach front property!
i reread the wiki article. it seems the direct cause of first opium war is Lin Zexu’s mass destruction of opium.
trapezoid, naaa, circular logic?
Trap my point has always been it would be stupid not to examine the science of climate change (All of it) not just one side of it.. Anything of interest to humans should be studied.
The sad reality is that the resistance and denial expressed by conservatists toward global warming is because to acknowledge and accept it would be akin to admitting that an issue which “the left” was first to take up was legitimate, and by extension legitimizes the ideology. The don’t want to admit they were wrong, so you get the vehement denials and abject disregard for science.
not really
and it should be examined by scientific methodology which includes skepticism
ft i agree
See your politicizing it Revanche I am not For you its political for me its not its scientific I havent drawn any final conclusions one way or the other
Revanche, wrong.. as you can tell I am conservitive and locally I fight for environmental issues along with a number of conservitives.
if Lin just kept the opium out of china but not destructed it, there would not be war
you have to understand the politics in china at the time
what was that?
I just don’t wanna spend more money on this leftie money maker than is really needed.
it was very weak, and the west was interested in the goods they could ship out of china
I was at the vanguard of the environmental movement in the early 70s because we had dead rivers and raw smoke going into the atmsophere.
freeTrade - No, its not political for me. Global warming is INHERENTLY neither a liberal or conservative things. ALL people are effected. I was describing the current politics surrounding the phony “debate,” which you yourself are supporting.
they hated the idea full ships going from china to europe, but returning empty
I was politically against this ommission of pollutants because they demostably caused damage
Phoney?
they killed rivers nothing lived in rivers ecologists told us they would never come back they have come back fully
Gore makes how much on the issue? I guess he is phony
but when they started releasing the effluents, no one saw that it would eventually kill the rivers
So I am proud of my environmental activism of my younger days
the brits came up with the idea of introducing opium use in china, developing the market by selling it cheap (like most drug dealers) and then co-opting the market
same with CO2 emissions
But today its getting to be political more than scientific and that disturbs me
People are staking political dreams and hopes on this phoney issue.
cause the brits held the source of supply of opium - india
who killed rivers?
FreeTrade - you’re completely disregarding the clear scientific concensus that exists vis-a-vis evidence of man-made global warming. why don’t you deny the scientific concensus on evolution while you’re at it ?
if given the chance, life would thrive in plutonium polluted rivers of course we wouldn’t.. but some life would
melmoth common sense told you if you dumped sulferic acid and oil and gunk from factories into the water it would kill ecosystems
in fact the west had many kinds of machinery that china could import, i think. but maybe china just wasn’t interested.
That was elementary science
you know that a river in ohio and pennsylvania caught fire?
Revanche, did you believe in global cooling? Remember all the science behind that?
Now we are in some of the most difficult science there is predicting climate and causes ?
Revanche, where were you in that debate?
but what of the BUNNIES????
china was not interested at the time, they had lots of labor but not much interst in dustrialization, atthe time
same with CO2 from fossil fuels, common sense tells you it will make unforeseeable changes to world climate
Revanche, did you believe in global cooling?
Australia is mean to BUNNIES! common and sense do nto belong int he same sentence
I always thought that was just an urban myth
and no, it does not
really happened more than once
I urge you to read the critics of the apocalyptic theory at NOAA, MIT, Harvard,UVA,And all the other universities in the world. norwegian scientists were the first to come up with the theory climate change was 100% solar and stellar activity related, I dont know If I believe them, but I do listen to them. and I also listen to people who claim we are having an influence on it.
TV - no i didn’t, and you’re intentionally exaggerating that. Moreover, previously incorrect hypotheses don’t invalidate present ones. That’s like saying flat-earthers were wrong, so people who think the earht is spheroid are wrong too. Use some logic, and not dispense with the entry level climate change denial rhetoric.
Revanche, did you did you not believe in global cooling?
there aren’t that many
i need help
And termites are having an influence
must be the same guy making the rounds
Melmoth yes there are.
believe me, there is NO controversy over this
melmoth your stupidity at times and especially the in your face stupidity grinds on my nerves..
you’re looked at like you were saying the world is flat
I have studied this so much in my spare time.
unless, of course, you’re into some kind of crazy political cult
the proper term is “anthrogenic global warming”
you must be aware of the harvesting of a deep core of ice from greenland, showing the climate on earth hundreds of thousands of years ago (due to the way the ice formed, once could see climate change)
I am not going to be insulted like that take a hike
Hrmm, my world is flat. sigh.
Oh well gee.
i think they finished that project 4-5 years ago?
“agree with me or you are a nut” -sound argument. I think I 1st encountered it ina Monty Python skit
I should of done a whois first
it would be more acceptable of britain declared the motive of war was “no democracy in china” or “WMD in china”…
FreeTrade - Don’t you see your own contradiction? You kicked OldSchool because he attacked the owner/operator of JUNKSCIENCE.COM, rather than what it says, but you yourself refuse to see An Inconvenient Truth because of WHO did it, rather than what it says. That’s the very definition of hypocrisy.
heh
you reserve the right to attack the who, rather than the what, but demand that others don’t do that as well.
a gu’bmint weanie ANY gub’mint is going to have a iron in that fire
No I kicked him for claiming I was a viewed as a flat earth advocate.
humans managed to travel back in time and pollute the atmosphere!
* OldSchool was kicked by FreeTrade (LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE NOT THE OWNER OF THE IPS)
Inconveniet truth, Gore and others make loads of money new fade of the decade.
And that is an insult for anyone who knows me includind the many scientists on this channel who know is bullshit, they who have more scientific experience than I do at least respect my opinion.
if
especially my skepticism which is another way of saying my mind is still open.
no, you attacked him for attacking the messenger, rather than the message, but you’re doing the SAME thing with Gore’s movie. you won’t see it because you don’t like gore, and think he’s politically-motivated, ergo his message must be wrong/worthless/slanted.
revanche you want to go next ?
Global warming? not really. Gore Pocket warmed with loot? You Becha!
Inconveniet, new fade envirnmental hyped Global warming is seen in the light of Global cooling, ozone holes and the evils of Nuclear power protests of the past
I am sick of insults and rudeness
that simple
“Justification of War: A Modern Approach
Your politicizing it as was he.
“Justification of War: A Modern Approach”?
I have a couple of 1970s books ont he coming ice age
I am looking at it from the view of an open minded scientific perspective.
FreeTrade - don’t threaten me with your petty bully horseshit. act like an adult for christ’s sake.
I and others are not true believers.
And there are a lot of scientists who disagree with melmoth who is apparently a european bureacrat.
go ahead an kick me, don’t threaten me and try to abuse me like you abuse your channel position.
maybe hes one of the russians who is making money off spain for thier pollution credits
i don’t give a damn. Grow the hell up.
Im not going to take that either..
actually melmoth is from iceland
c’mon big guy you’re tough.
5 Abusive Domain or User Im just not going to tak this kind of rudeness, people disagree here all the time without being banned or kicked. its not hard to do
hhhrmm, don’t hit the happy fun ball.
The problem is noone questioned my sciense Or examples of science. they question things which are irrelevant, like putting a political spin on it.
FreeTrade, for me it is a matter of faith vs facts and track record. fool me once shame on you fool me 5 times shame on me.
There are always going to be competing theories, that’s part of science, the relevant question is what is the current mainstream view
junkscience.com is wrong because of why ? I want people to explain it to me because of the scientific claims it makes. not because someone owns the domain who is a consultant. there are plenty of consultants on science in academia and outside academica The mainstream view though depends a lot on whether you ask it in terms of politically ? Scientifically ? Meterological society ? Climatologists ? PHysicists ? Chemists ? You will get different answers depending on who you ask
The mainstream view is the view that gets published in peer-reviewed scientific journals
and also, its not only a question of is global warming occuring most people agree it is.
uh So there!” and they don’t liek that either
its what does it mean and what is causing it which can not be answered Now I must work,, bbiab
why is that
the great blazini
she i’m not changing my modern way of life to stave off the unstopable ice age for a couple centuries, anymore than i’;d stop calling mohammed a pedophile just to peacefully coexist with the horde of allah
ir ur galaxy
Climate Change is always with us. Man made or not. But these guys have have not track record to stand on.
in*
oh fuck (s)he’s back
you the same blazini who was down with fecty?
pardon my language
hmmm how did polonium 210 manage to stay hidden on british airways until just recently?
BBL
there are those who might make unkind remarks about jesus, or moses
it’s a conspiracy
FreeTrade, take care…
Russia has it’s ways.
‘traces of polonium’
trapezoid, thats their right
didn’t moses marry a young girl when he was about 300 years old?
Polonium in its natural state seldom wears a trenchcoat
unless of course, it wasn’t transported on those planes…
you wont see me call for the death of a cartoonist who lampoons jesus
lets hope this ‘polonium’ doesnt spread
thats why i refuse to make concessions to muslims
not to mention abraham, screwing his wife’s maid
mohammed had sex with a 9 yr old
yep, arbaham diddled the help and caused the whole mess
Job offered his daughters as hookers
albeit with her permission
doug nope
one possibility is that they didn’t PUT the polonium on the plane till recently, OR they didn’t TEST for it until the russian defector died
ok.. an old RNS boss used to use that nick. nevermind
i wouldn;t suspect a polonium screening is typical cabin service between flights
The thing about global warming debate is that there is a lot of evidence out there, many piece conflicting, and it takes someone with a degree in Atmospheric Sciences or related field to integrate them with any degree of reliability However, most people who argue about it, don’t have a PhD in meteorology, so this is a never ending debate
hehe.. how hazardous was the spy’s radiation?
perhaps it should be if the russkies are making a habit of this.
I would have thought that after 9/11, geiger counters would be used on planes as a standard
yes, but why would they not test a plane for nuclear material is this day and age?
you have to admire putin, Bush really pales in comparison of guts, this guy will set off a dirty bomb in london to get one guy, meanwhile bush hasn;t gotten rid of a single opponent in 6 years
not another bomb in london we dont need anymore
nharris about as radiactive as a glow in the dark watch only dangerous if injested
yeah.. that’s what I thought.. people are all panicking though.. “oooh this spy touched things children will!”
Civility and politeness could have avoided every one of those bans, its a real shame they couldnt be either. Anyway I have to get these invoices in.. busy day
nharris yeah it’s stupid, the only thing interesting about it is as evidence of espionage
right Sanjay Gupta of CNN was detailing what happens to the body when that stuff is ingested
sure he has saddam
radiation punches tiny holes in your intestines, so all that bacteria leeches out into your body
geiger counters are pretty cheap, but given the amount of radiation, he could have hid it IN a watch and no one could have picked it up as anything unusual
Ph boy here I go again. In the biblical story HorseGirl, God said that the children of Haggar (The arabs) Would be blessed.. Maybe not as much as Sarahs child Issac but nevertheless Loved by god. Not that I believ ein any of the crap but your using it to promote your bigotry and racism. Ph boy here I go again. In the biblical story HorseGirl, God said that the children of Haggar (The arabs) Would be blessed.. Maybe not as much as Sarahs child Issac but nevertheless Loved by god. Not that I believ ein any of the crap but your using it to promote your bigotry and racism.
…
FreeTrade lagged?
ouch..that ping hurt
only for a second.
yes, do it again er..
then how was it detected recently?
RobVanDam well, if they find that level not in a watch… if you find something radiactive that shouldn’t be, that’s a giveaway
hmm haggar is a good cartoon in the sunday paper kind of crude though
wonder how Horsegirl got her name
do you really lol
hehehe now Horseboy, Enumclaw WA.. I would not want to know about http://www.consumptionjunction.com/content/detail.asp?id=63363&Type=3&Page=1
I’m the God Damned Future President of these United States of America grr
god I hope not
lol
as president, I would legalize prostitution, crack down on welfare/disability fraud, end perks and discrimination for races and creeds, and make beer tax deductible.
nharris: eh, prostitution should probaly remain a state controlled issue.
yeah good idea..some states aren’t suited for it
im all for legalizing it; but really it’s not illegal at the federal level; and thus; already legal if the states wanted it.
I’m against Prostitution. I’ve seen it break up so many families
we all got to make a living right?
if a man visits prostitutes .. it is not the fault of the prostitute. Let the man accept personal responsiblity. she didn’t break up the home .. he did
anything breaking up a family. I’m against. one of my quotes is Loyalty grants me higher power !
Timothy - does that mean you’re against unarranged marriages?
but money can break up a family
timmy .. then look to the man who is doing this .. not to the prostitute. She merely provides a service. She is not out to break up his home and probably doesn’t give a damn about him once he lays his money down. It is his decision and his responsiblity. If the family breaks up its not her fault .. it is his fault. And it would probably break up anyway. He is a jerk.
Good point Comet.
CB maybe the wife aint doing her part
A man is suppose to keep his eye on the ball and not on legs
that is why he is looking elsewhere
if you blame prostitutes for breaking up a family you have to blame gun makers for banks being robbed… that’s too far a liberal stretch for me
sides I am a man I will stick it anywhere heh
sweet .. you mean she isn’t dressing up like a whore and giving him blow jobs in back alleys? so its her fault?
the liberal label… the well’s been poisoned… don’t drink from there!!
dunno CB never been unfaithful to my old lady over thirty years
I call it temptation !
its his decision and his responsibility. If he is an alcoholic it is nobody’s fault but his. If he is a drug addict it is not the person who sold it to him. If he hadn’t gone to that person he would have gone to someone else. It is his choice. Put the blame where it belongs and don’t make excuses for him.
does anyone know how much a good looking prostute cost’s the street walkers are all run down pigs
the callgirls are about $1200/night http://www.consumptionjunction.com/content/detail.asp?id=63191&Type=3&Page=1 mmm yummy
you know if a guy is trash and irresponsible .. then let him wear the label.
damn
why would anyone boink a thing in hot pants that weigh’s 200 lbs
most hookers in SF are skinny, but SKANKY
heh then these guys want to slob their tounge all over them after another 3 or so have been there already when I was in the army it was a trip a lot different overseas
nharris the callgirls are about $1200/night — Screw that.
hehehe yeah now in japan, businessmen and high ranking military officers will often have these super high priced prostitutes arranged for their guests
it used to be common in Michigan when Japanese officals would come over…
I would be embarassed if someone got me a prostitute, cause I’d refuseit.
Why would you refuse it?
hehe japanese men LOVE skanky american women. We had a japanese squadron visiting us, and they took a day trip to Reno..almost all came back with the crabs
lol Gromit_, I have a girlfriend. Not to mention I just don’t need it either way.
The greenhouse effect is unquestionably real and helps to regulate the temperature of our planet. It is essential for life on Earth and is one of Earth’s natural processes. Human activity has been increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (mostly carbon dioxide from combustion of coal, oil, and gas; plus a few other trace gases). There is no scientific debate on this point.
Volcanoes produce far more damage to the atmosphere daily than man could make up for by dropping his habits overnight
Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.6°C (plus or minus 0.2°C) since the late-19th century, and about 0.4°F (0.2 to 0.3°C) over the past 25 years (the period with the most credible data). The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S.) have, in fact, cooled over the last century. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
cyclical. There’s an ice age in our future too…only to be followed by another warming cycle
yup.
its much more fun to go around yelling “the world is ending! the world is ending!”
The Sky is falling the sky is falling!
