|
|
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
|
|
|
"I was Wondering.."
Snidget 44369 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-09-14, 08:11 AM (EST)
 
  |
|
1. "RE: I was Wondering.." |
LAST EDITED ON 01-09-14 AT 08:13 AM (EST)One cold snap does not decades of warming break. Nor did anyone decide to believe in global warming from one (or year after year) of record breaking heatwaves. So why should one cold snap change anyone's mind. What I'm interested to see is if this polar vortex (which happens somewhere in the world pretty much every last freaking winter, just hasn't hit the USA this bad for awhile) even puts a dent in the global temperature rise for this year. Or even the average temperature of the USA. I think we had a couple of these back in the 1980's I remember one Christmas in undergrad that was insanely cold (Mississippi froze in St. Louis for the first time in decades) and another in grad school that lasted so long I ended up buying a ski mask just to be able to walk to class. Just because we haven't had one since then doesn't mean this is something that has never happened in all of history and is the first step to a global ice age. But I may be ranting.  FWIW, warming models pretty much all indicate the climate gets less stable so you get more extremes in both directions as the AVERAGE temperature changes. Everything that makes hot weather systems more intense also tends to make cold weather systems more intense as well as lack of any storms more intense (droughts). I hope this killed off at least a few bugs (and that the RTVW bugs are safe).
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
 |
|
|
Snidget 44369 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-09-14, 10:11 AM (EST)
|
|
3. "RE: I was Wondering.." |
It is always fun when the media finally discovers a term for something and act like the thingy has never happened before in all of human history. 
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
suzzee 5277 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-13-14, 03:07 PM (EST)
|
|
16. "RE: Have you seen..." |
Great for the whole family! An entire movie that jumps the shark. Yeah I watched it. A couple of times. 
A Tribe collectible
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kingfish 16908 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-13-14, 11:05 AM (EST)
 |
|
12. "RE: I was Wondering.." |
In absolute terms, no one has proven anything except that there have been periods of global warming in the past caused by natural events and cycles. If the presence of humans on the earth influences cyclic warming, then, as products of the natural environment ourselves, anything we do is also natural. Manmade is natural. Because of the inertia and immensity of the elements involved and the sensitivity of adjustments required to control and reverse global warming, it's also probably beyond our control. Especially if you also consider the international political climate and the fact that new leaders (like our president) will decide that the ideas of the previous presidents are wrong because they belong to the other party, and will reverse/restructure plans to combat global warming every four to eight years. Subjective opinion: Even the most intelligent, highest minded, and most benevolent meddling in our weather will be counterproductive, and the more extensive that the meddling is, the more counterproductive it will be. Even with that said, though, whatever we can do on individual levels (including factories etc. as individuals) we should do. We live here, and we should practice good housekeeping.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
newsomewayne 9201 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-13-14, 02:07 PM (EST)
|
|
15. "RE: I was Wondering.." |
I do think the good housekeeping does extend to emissions of things like CO2.I had a thought on this the other day. I heard a report on the radio that our government has spent billions overseas in aid to developing countries to "combat the effects of global warming." I think some were direct funds while others went through the U.N. Meanwhile, our government's EPA forces the expenditure of millions of private sector dollars be spent to clean up their processes to prevent more global warming. Now, since there are so many things wrong with the first part - who gets the money, who decides what project is required to supposedly combat the effects of global warming, how much is actually used on the project and not skimmed off the top by whoever overseas the project (including local dictators and U.N. overseers), who decides how effective a project is going to be or has been, and on and on - all that being likely to cause failures in the stated goal, wouldn't it make much more sense to spend that money here, by, you know, fixing the alleged source of the problem to begin with? Instead of government coming to company A and saying, you need to spend half of your budget next year on this problem or you'll have to shut down, they could say we have identified this problem in your plant and are going to spend this much money to fix it. Boom; planet saved, plant saved, jobs saved, tax base saved. And since the money was going to be stolen spent, anyways, there is no additional cost to the tax payer. * assume the word 'allegedly' appears wherever appropriate. 
Tebow Time is over. We prefer to win games in the 1st quarter.
Trade managed by GM Agman, 2012
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estee 56183 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
01-21-14, 06:15 PM (EST)
|
|
27. "RE: I was Wondering.." |
'You're going to be driving on some degree of slush tomorrow, which is an experience most of you have very little experience with. Why not deal with it by getting drunk?'Lovely state, really. My prep work for the storm was basic: after reading the EW cover article on Sherlock, I discovered I can stream the first six episodes/movies from Amazon as a no-additional-cost part of my Prime membership. Popcorn, chocolate, hot mulled cider, and a fleece blanket, then remotely consider peeking outside on Thursday. I kind of wish the Pro Bowl was tomorrow so I could ignore that too. This is just being practical. If I have to break through four-foot snowdrifts in order to clear my vehicle and my prize is facing a foot (or more) of snow on every access road I'd need for pretty much anything, then I'm calling in stranded in order not to have someone else call for me with 'Between incarnations, may be back with you in roughly eighteen years and nine months, but no promises.' Dealing with that residue is begging for injury (on up) on multiple fronts. I took one look at the game odds and declared forfeit.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
|
newsomewayne 9201 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
03-12-14, 10:45 AM (EST)
|
|
29. "At least these guys are talking about it." |
LAST EDITED ON 03-12-14 AT 10:46 AM (EST)Because the media certainly never brings it up on their own. http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/10/politics/climate-change/index.html Mirroring a tactic employed by Cruz during his marathon effort aimed at derailing Obamacare, Except that Cruz was fighting against terrible legislation ramrodded through by a near-Super Majority. The Dems were fighting against...wait, they still have majority?...well, they're trying to get passed a...oh, they don't have any particular legislation about this going right now? So what's the mirror thing about? A mirror reflects, or another word would be deflect. I get it now. They were trying to deflect. Deflect attention from Ukraine, Malaysian plane, IRS and Lerner, Benghazi, Keystone, Fast and Furious...
U.S. Government: Doing everything you used to do yourself for you since 2008.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
foonermints 12866 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
03-12-14, 09:09 PM (EST)
 |
|
30. "RE: At least these guys are talking about it." |
Floating icebergs!
Drowning Polar Bears!Heck, maybe it is real, but how is the US going to stop China from burning all that coal? A Democrat "Feel-Good" that does not address the many problems of their own doing that beg better attention. Benghazi bothers me most. President Hilory? I would really prefer Hoover. Or Coolidge. Fast and Furious was a wreck. IRS targeting Republican groups? OH! Let's look at the poor Polar Bears! Not dirty politics by democrats!
Republican or Democrat, it's our country and whoever sullies it should be taken to task. I'm going to go read "The Lorax" tonight at Midnight. Maybe it will cure Daylight Savings Time. 
I'm with Dakota
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
foonermints 12866 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"
|
03-12-14, 10:18 PM (EST)
|
|
32. "I'll Concede" |
Global weather is different than it has been for the last decade.
Why? China? Something our beastly little selves have done?Bad China! Bad! My tax dollars probably went to one bulletproof window in a hotel in Nigeria. The Southern California drought notwithstanding.
Who knows? Maybe I'm looking at $4/gallon water? There goes the lawn! 
We've got a huge Prickly Pear cactus I can suck the juice out from.
|
|
Remove |
Alert |
Edit |
Reply |
Reply With Quote | Top |
| |
|
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
|
|
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
Must have tripped into THE POLAR VORTEX!"
