Arctic Defrost Dumping Snow on U.S. and Europe

[Bonam]

of course... and my flippant reply was in proportion to your 'back of the napkin' musings.

Do you disagree that self-correction of this type is possible? I, again, contend that it has to be a feature of the Earth system, and that all the proof you need is that we are here today. If the Earth system was not self-correcting, unstable processes would have wreaked havoc on any life that tried to evolve. Instead, we have had an environment that changes only very slowly, and returns to equilibrium even after huge perturbations.

Look, I'm the first to grieve at receding glaciers... after all, I enjoy spending my weekends hiking on them. And I agree that average global temperatures are rising, and that this is caused at least in part by rising CO2 levels due to human activities. I just don't think that the current or projected level of changes has any chance of causing runaway "chain reactions" that lead to complete catastrophe.

which is your solution oriented engineering background speaking with a confidence that uncertain "new technologies...

A "solution oriented engineering background" is precisely what is needed to solve issues like this. Just cutting economic activity to reduce CO2 emissions is a harmful knee-jerk reaction. Our civilization is not static, predictions about the future cannot be made on the assumption that technology will remain the same. Due to the accelerating pace of technical progress and the inability to predict what form that progress will take, any sort of predictions related to human civilization that are more than 20-30 years in the future are garbage. This must be taken into account in any policy discussion.

[waldo]

Grow trees.

studies have shown that an effective mitigation might only arise within a tropical & sub-tropical climates/latitudes context where year round growth is possible - because active growth is the key. Additionally, northern/temperate latitudes are subject to albedo impacts and slow/shortened growth periods where, effectively, trees in northern/temperate latitudes have a net warming effect on climate outweighing their carbon sink abilities. And yet, even if growing trees could provide the offsetting mitigation, would there be any more of a global political will surface to that end, than that required to "simply" agree to reduced CO2 emission treaties? Would Canada, for instance, open it's borders to mass emigration brought upon by the need to shift whole populations of millions of people... in order to grow trees in land currently populated (or farmed) as a result of past deforestation - notwithstanding changing land use implications?

[Bonam]

Would Canada, for instance, open it's borders to mass emigration brought upon by the need to shift whole populations of millions of people... in order to grow trees in land currently populated (or farmed) as a result of past deforestation - notwithstanding changing land use implications?

No, Canada would not be willing to be overrun by millions of third-worlders to support some dubious plant growing agenda. We already let in 200-300k / year and that's more than enough.

Anyway, if it's a matter of planting things, kelp forests and other marine plantlife has a far bigger impact.

[waldo]

Do you disagree that self-correction of this type is possible? I, again, contend that it has to be a feature of the Earth system, and that all the proof you need is that we are here today. If the Earth system was not self-correcting, unstable processes would have wreaked havoc on any life that tried to evolve. Instead, we have had an environment that changes only very slowly, and returns to equilibrium even after huge perturbations.

in our lifetimes... in the presumed lifetimes of our descendants, and their descendants, and their descendants, and on, and on, what's the point of discussing self-correction on major perturbations, particularly your conjecture on self-correction... be it your response (this following response) to melting Greenland ice sheets, or the myriad of other possible 'worst-case' climate change scenarios? Certainly you can't profess self-correction will be within the shortest of timeframes...

ice sheets melt -> this disturbs the ocean current system that keeps northern europe warm -> new ice sheets form there cause that area is much colder now -> earth's average albedo is raised -> temperatures decrease -> ocean current system starts back up again

Look, I'm the first to grieve at receding glaciers... after all, I enjoy spending my weekends hiking on them. And I agree that average global temperatures are rising, and that this is caused at least in part by rising CO2 levels due to human activities. I just don't think that the current or projected level of changes has any chance of causing runaway "chain reactions" that lead to complete catastrophe

again, a matter of degrees. That glacier example hits home, for example, in regards recent discussion of the Himalayan glacier melt and the looming Asian water crisis... the meltwaters of which supply crucial seasonal flows to the Ganges, Brahmaputra, Salween, Irrawaddy, Mekong, Yangtze and Yellow rivers, on which hundreds of millions of people downstream depend for their livelihoods and their drinking water. No biggee?

A "solution oriented engineering background" is precisely what is needed to solve issues like this. Just cutting economic activity to reduce CO2 emissions is a harmful knee-jerk reaction. Our civilization is not static, predictions about the future cannot be made on the assumption that technology will remain the same. Due to the accelerating pace of technical progress and the inability to predict what form that progress will take, any sort of predictions related to human civilization that are more than 20-30 years in the future are garbage. This must be taken into account in any policy discussion.

practical solutions entail much more than simple CO2 emission reductions... I've made that clear in the many times I've proffered the IEA Roadmap - a roadmap strategy that most certainly speaks to technology deployments, technology advancements and technology gaps (and expectations to fill them within the roadmap timeframe)... the Roadmap that covers a 40 year period.

[waldo]

No, Canada would not be willing to be overrun by millions of third-worlders to support some dubious plant growing agenda. We already let in 200-300k / year and that's more than enough.

Anyway, if it's a matter of planting things, kelp forests and other marine plantlife has a far bigger impact.

so that's a no then to others suggesting we grow trees... and this was/is GostHacked's end-all/be-all solution. As an aside, are you... and will you... be at all phased by the first-worlds causal affect on those third-worlders climate change impacts?

[WIP]

On the contrary, the Earth is closer to a system with a slowly moving equilibrium.

On the contrary, there is no equilibrium that Earth's ecosystems to some sort of average. Throughout Earth history, you can find no trends of temperatures returning to some sort of average range...same with CO2 and oxygen levels; they can move up or down over the ages, but there is no magical Gaia force to return everything to equilibrium.

Perturbations are damped out. For example, look at simple predator-prey systems. If the predators decrease in number for whatever reason, the prey will get eaten less, their numbers will increase, which will make it easier for the predators to find food and survive; they will again increase in number as a result and prevent the prey population from growing unbounded, restoring equilibrium. This kind of relationship holds for virtually all the interrelated systems on Earth.

A predator/prey relationship is not the same as climatic cycles. There have been periods in Earth's history when the entire planet was locked in ice; where were the forces to return things to equilibrium? Same thing when excessive volcanism ramped up temperatures and almost destroyed all life on Earth. The only thing that returned it to "equilibrium" was the cessation of volcanic activity.

How do I know? Simple, because we're still here. If small perturbations led to unstable "chain reactions", then events like volcanoes and meteor/comet strikes would be certain to trigger such chain reactions leading to the demise of all life.

That's it...."we're still here!" Maybe you didn't hear about it, but at least one of the major extinctions -- Permian/Triassic, came pretty damn close to spiraling in to a death cycle that almost wiped out our ancestors.....but if they became extinct, we wouldn't be here to gloat about still being here.

[Bonam]

so that's a no then to others suggesting we grow trees

Growing trees is fine, flooding Canada with millions of people to do it is not fine.

As an aside, are you... and will you... be at all phased by the first-worlds causal affect on those third-worlders climate change impacts?

Not particularly. I am much more interested in what will happen in the countries that I and people I know live in.

On the contrary, there is no equilibrium that Earth's ecosystems to some sort of average. Throughout Earth history, you can find no trends of temperatures returning to some sort of average range...same with CO2 and oxygen levels; they can move up or down over the ages, but there is no magical Gaia force to return everything to equilibrium.

On the contrary, take a look at this graph:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EPICA_temperature_plot.svg

The Earth's temperatures have been oscillating around an equilibrium for nearly the past million years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Five_Myr_Climate_Change.svg

Over the past 5 million years, we see evidence of a slowly changing temperature equilibrium, with the same kind of quick oscillations around it.

There have been periods in Earth's history when the entire planet was locked in ice; where were the forces to return things to equilibrium?

That ice melted, did it not?

Same thing when excessive volcanism ramped up temperatures and almost destroyed all life on Earth. The only thing that returned it to "equilibrium" was the cessation of volcanic activity.

Yup. That is a perfect example of return to equilibrium. High volcanic activity means you are letting off the pressure that is building up those volcanoes faster, which means they will exhaust themselves and the amount of volcanism will decline.

That's it...."we're still here!" Maybe you didn't hear about it, but at least one of the major extinctions -- Permian/Triassic, came pretty damn close to spiraling in to a death cycle that almost wiped out our ancestors.....but if they became extinct, we wouldn't be here to gloat about still being here.

But we are here.

[Sir Bandelot]

Well I am no expert in these matters, but a tree is mostly carbon, and that carbon as to come from somewhere. Maybe the evergreens, pines do not suck up as much co2 as those ones in the Amazon did... you know... the place in South America where great swaths of rain forest were cut down to make cattle pastures.

But trees take a long time to grow. Huge crops of marijuana, on the other hand, which have a turn around cycle of about 3 months per crop... would provide excellent fiber, seed and flowers. And it's a cash crop. You would have no problem finding volunteers to help work the land...

[WIP]

On the contrary, take a look at this graph:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EPICA_temperature_plot.svg

The Earth's temperatures have been oscillating around an equilibrium for nearly the past million years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Five_Myr_Climate_Change.svg

I was talking timescales longer than 800,000 years...which is a mere blip in comparison with the age of the Earth.

Over the past 5 million years, we see evidence of a slowly changing temperature equilibrium, with the same kind of quick oscillations around it.

That ice melted, did it not?

Looks like some pretty wide zigs and zags on that graph, and all of those ups and downs showed a slide of a few degrees...but I'm not a statistician. My original point comes from a mathematician (whose name I do not recall) who played a large role in developing chaos and complexity studies, and made the point in a talk I heard that ice core data, such as you linked, shows no median temperature for the planet, and also concluded that our biosphere is a chaotic system that appears to have natural cycles until sudden collapse....needless to say, he was a critic of the Gaia Hypothesis.

Yup. That is a perfect example of return to equilibrium. High volcanic activity means you are letting off the pressure that is building up those volcanoes faster, which means they will exhaust themselves and the amount of volcanism will decline.

No! The volcanic activity that caused the great extinctions was not volcanoes blowing up; those sorts of things happen on a random basis. The volcanic activity associated with the Permian/Triassic Extinction was the gradual formation of flood basalt plains in Siberia -- The Siberian Traps....a process that took at least 100,000 years up to a million years. Likewise a flood basalt was formed in India 63 million years ago, and should be considered to be at least as significant cause of the Cretaceous/Tertiary Extinction as the asteroid hitting the Yucatan at the time.

But we are here.

Do you accept this argument when it comes to the claims of people like Frank Tipler regarding the physical laws of the universe being so perfect they are proof of a creator?

[Bonam]

I was talking timescales longer than 800,000 years...which is a mere blip in comparison with the age of the Earth.

Those were the graphs I could find from a quick googling. I'm sure longer term data could be found.

Looks like some pretty wide zigs and zags on that graph, and all of those ups and downs showed a slide of a few degrees...but I'm not a statistician. My original point comes from a mathematician (whose name I do not recall) who played a large role in developing chaos and complexity studies, and made the point in a talk I heard that ice core data, such as you linked, shows no median temperature for the planet, and also concluded that our biosphere is a chaotic system that appears to have natural cycles until sudden collapse....needless to say, he was a critic of the Gaia Hypothesis.

Hmm well you must have misinterpreted a few things. First of all, ANY set of data necessarily has a median. The biosphere IS a chaotic system, but chaotic systems can (and many do) still have equilibria. And I agree, our system undergoes bifurcations ("sudden collapse"). But bifurcations of a chaotic system require that it moves to a different parameter range than it was at before. Given the small magnitude of the changes we are observing, it is unlikely we are gonna push it to a bifurcation, unless we happen to be hanging right beside one already.

No! The volcanic activity that caused the great extinctions was not volcanoes blowing up; those sorts of things happen on a random basis. The volcanic activity associated with the Permian/Triassic Extinction was the gradual formation of flood basalt plains in Siberia -- The Siberian Traps....a process that took at least 100,000 years up to a million years. Likewise a flood basalt was formed in India 63 million years ago, and should be considered to be at least as significant cause of the Cretaceous/Tertiary Extinction as the asteroid hitting the Yucatan at the time.

Ok, well, I don't know enough about geology to understand exactly what a flood basalt plain is but it seems to me that any volcanic activity (where hot material from inside the Earth is expelled onto the surface) necessarily would relieve pressure at the volcanic source and thus further activity would, after a time, be reduced.

Do you accept this argument when it comes to the claims of people like Frank Tipler regarding the physical laws of the universe being so perfect they are proof of a creator?

No, and I don't think it's a good analogy. I am not talking about a Gaia hypothesis. I am just making some remarks based on my limited insights into the nonlinear dynamics of chaotic systems, on which I took a graduate course a few months back. There's only two kinds of chaotic systems that can exist over a wide range of parameters: those that have equilibria, and those that exhibit exponential divergence. The climate of planet in a stable orbit around a stable star is necessarily an equilibrium system. You can change the parameters around and they will affect the equilibrium points. Bifurcations can occur, but they exist at discrete points along the parameter range and are finite in number. Given that prior hot periods did not trigger catastrophic death spirals, I don't know what evidence we can have that the current warming trend will.

[dre]

So yes, the planet is interconnected, and all its systems affect one another, but perturbing these systems will only lead to stable changes which will self-correct over time, rather than leading to unstable changes which grow over time.

"Over time" could mean pretty much anything though. Could be millions of years or hundreds of thousands.

[jbg]

you need to get your head out of your ass-holey localized regional mindset - hey?

I didn't regionally restrict my question. You can be sure of that.

Your response shows that these "global temperature graphs" are a made-up amalgam and not reflective of any real figures. Or else why would East Anglia have zapped their records of the figures?

Edited February 4, 2011 by jbg

[GostHacked]

within degrees of qualification... "self-correcting" doesn't mean much to lost species affected by loss of habitat due to climate change. I sense wyly is speaking to the more, as you say, "perturbing" events... the so-called tipping points more globally serious than others... like... for example, the total melting of the Greenland ice-sheets. I'm not quite sure what the "correction" would be for that one; just how the ice-sheets would grow back in a warmer climate... or perhaps you're speaking to a kind of "correction" that presumes on adaptation to submerged coastal cities with all that entails (like mass population migrations, for instance).

We destroy more natural habitats so we can put up large rows of housing than climate change can ever do. Our cities and the waste we produce is a prime example of that.

[WIP]

Those were the graphs I could find from a quick googling. I'm sure longer term data could be found.

Hmm well you must have misinterpreted a few things. First of all, ANY set of data necessarily has a median.

Certainly, if we had a method to measure temperatures going all the way back to the beginning of the Earth, we would have a median and a mean average temperature numbers. But, would they be of any value if earth history did not establish any clear temperature trends, either up or down?

The biosphere IS a chaotic system, but chaotic systems can (and many do) still have equilibria. And I agree, our system undergoes bifurcations ("sudden collapse"). But bifurcations of a chaotic system require that it moves to a different parameter range than it was at before. Given the small magnitude of the changes we are observing, it is unlikely we are gonna push it to a bifurcation, unless we happen to be hanging right beside one already.

Over a short term, you may have an equilibrium to return to, but what equilibria do we find in between Snowball Earth and the hothouse planet where ice caps disappeared, and tropical vegetation covered most of the earth?

Ok, well, I don't know enough about geology to understand exactly what a flood basalt plain is but it seems to me that any volcanic activity (where hot material from inside the Earth is expelled onto the surface) necessarily would relieve pressure at the volcanic source and thus further activity would, after a time, be reduced.

From what I gather, the large scale volcanic activity that caused the formation of features like the Siberian Traps and the Deccan Traps in India, was closely tied to the movement of continental plates. It's not something that's tied in with the needs of the biosphere, and would not have followed any sort of regular pattern of activity.

Given that prior hot periods did not trigger catastrophic death spirals, I don't know what evidence we can have that the current warming trend will.

It's the hot times, like the Permian/Triassic, which caused the mass extinction death spirals. And since we are causing a warming event that is occurring more rapidly than anything in the past, it's not a stretch that our current warming has plunged us into a death spiral already, based on species extinction stats that are being gathered by zoologists and biologists around the world.

As for Gaia, and life always returning to a state of balance, one of my favourite scientists over the last few years is paleontologist - Peter Ward, who has a habit of kicking over sacred cows that are taken for granted...starting with life being ubiquitous in the Universe -- which he attacked in collaboration with astrophysicist Donald Brownlee in the book: Rare Earth - Why Complex Life Is Uncommon In The Universe, and recently with The Medea Hypothesis: Is Life on Earth Ultimately Self-Destructive?. Some big problems for Gaia presented in the geologic record are:

* Methane poisoning, 3.5 billion years ago

* The oxygen catastrophe, 2.7 billion years ago

* Snowball earth twice, 2.3 billion years ago and 790–630 million years ago

* At least five putative hydrogen sulfide-induced mass extinctions, such as the Great Dying, 251.4 million years ago

Instead of going with the common wisdom that life is self-sustaining and trying to regulate its environment, it's worth asking if the catastrophes of the past aren't evidence that life is instead self-destructive, through it's attempt to dominate an environment and consume all available resources.

[jbg]

"Boats were still in the water during the first week of January," said David Phillips, a senior climatologist with Environment Canada, referring to southern Baffin Island, some 2,000 km north of Montreal. This is a region that receives just four or five hours of weak sunlight during the long winter. Temperatures normally range from -25 to -35 degrees C but were above zero on some days in January.

"It's impossible for many people in parts of the eastern Arctic to safely get on the ice to hunt much-needed food for their families - for the second winter in a row," Phillips said in a report.

The warming and melting of the Arctic is happening much faster than expected and new data reveals that huge volumes of warmer water from the North Atlantic are now flowing into and warming up the Arctic Ocean, researchers reported Friday in the journal Science.

Worry not about Baffin Island (link, text below):

Alerts: Iqaluit

All Alerts In Effect

Wind Chill WarningWind Chill WarningIssued at 10:11 PM EST Sunday 6 February 2011

Summary

Extreme wind chills near minus 50 tonight. This is a warning that extreme wind chill conditions are imminent or occurring in these regions. Monitor weather conditions..Listen for updated statements.

Details

The combination of northwest winds of 30 to 40 km/h and temperatures near minus 35 will produce extreme wind chills of minus 50 or colder tonight. Wind chills will moderate slightly Monday morning. At these extreme wind chill values frostbite on exposed skin may occur in less than 5 minutes.

[wyly]

Worry not about Baffin Island (link, text below):

Alerts: Iqaluit

All Alerts In Effect

Wind Chill WarningWind Chill WarningIssued at 10:11 PM EST Sunday 6 February 2011

Summary

Extreme wind chills near minus 50 tonight. This is a warning that extreme wind chill conditions are imminent or occurring in these regions. Monitor weather conditions..Listen for updated statements.

Details

The combination of northwest winds of 30 to 40 km/h and temperatures near minus 35 will produce extreme wind chills of minus 50 or colder tonight. Wind chills will moderate slightly Monday morning. At these extreme wind chill values frostbite on exposed skin may occur in less than 5 minutes.

-50 wind chill

we've had far colder than that in calgary, regina, winterpeg, edmonton this winter, it's routine stuff for the arctic ...

[The_Squid]

Worry not about Baffin Island (link, text below):

Alerts: Iqaluit

All Alerts In Effect

Wind Chill WarningWind Chill WarningIssued at 10:11 PM EST Sunday 6 February 2011

Summary

Extreme wind chills near minus 50 tonight. This is a warning that extreme wind chill conditions are imminent or occurring in these regions. Monitor weather conditions..Listen for updated statements.

Details

The combination of northwest winds of 30 to 40 km/h and temperatures near minus 35 will produce extreme wind chills of minus 50 or colder tonight. Wind chills will moderate slightly Monday morning. At these extreme wind chill values frostbite on exposed skin may occur in less than 5 minutes.

Weather is not the same as climate.

You're giving the weather of a distinct location in a thread discussing climate change. You do know that makes no sense, right?

2 days ago, when I was on the west coast of V.I., the temperature was 14 degrees C. Is that relevant to the discussion of global warming? It sure was strangely warm.... toasty in fact. It must mean GW is true then, right? local temperatures at a point in time are utterly irrelevant... but you already knew that.... didn't you?

[wyly]

Weather is not the same as climate.

You're giving the weather of a distinct location in a thread discussing climate change. You do know that makes no sense, right?

2 days ago, when I was on the west coast of V.I., the temperature was 14 degrees C. Is that relevant to the discussion of global warming? It sure was strangely warm.... toasty in fact. It must mean GW is true then, right? local temperatures at a point in time are utterly irrelevant... but you already knew that.... didn't you?

we've already established he's a troll...

[jbg]

we've already established he's a troll...

Listen, I disagree with you on a topic open to substantial difference of opinion. My posts are generally serious and well-though out. I am not a troll.

[waldo]

My posts are generally serious and well-though out.

except for those where you're trolling or those where you're brandishing your skullcap beanie with feverish abandon

[jbg]

except for those where you're trolling or those where you're brandishing your skullcap beanie with feverish abandon

Define what you mean by a "skullcap beanie"? Do you mean a yarmulke? I don't wear one except when in Temple.

You wear you hatred of Jews on a sleeve. You are a disgusting excuse for a human being.

[waldo]

You wear you hatred of Jews on a sleeve. You are a disgusting excuse for a human being.

hatred? Not in the least... however, your feverish behaviour pattern is well established - where you quite regularly label others as being "Jew haters", should they 'dare' to offer any semblance of a countering comment/thought to 'most anything' you might perceive as pro-Israeli. Your feeble attempts to marginalize me won't work - pattern posts are just a MLW search away... like the following quote-stream, where you out of the blue attach your accusatory labeling. In any case, let's not let this detract from an equally marginalizing effort to clearly label you a troll in regards to climate change, particularly areas where you continue to present a full-on, flummoxed display over climate versus weather - hey?

Video

This video is too close to the truth.

truth?... is this the truth you favour?

Latma's editor, and the creative force behind the video, is Caroline Glick. Glick is the deputy-managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. But more importantly, she's the Senior Fellow for Middle East Affairs of the Center for Security Policy.

CSP is a far-right think tank founded by Reagan-era Defense Department official and "Scoop" Jackson protege Frank Gaffney. The board is made up of representatives of defense contractors who do business with Israel and the most implacably hawkish members of the neocon Republican foreign policy establishment. It's funded in large part by ultra-conservative American Zionists.

Latma, Glick tells us, is "is the initiative of the Center for Security Policy's Middle East media project...."

Yes, that's right, Frank Gaffney's ultra-right-wing, pro-Israel think tank is producing incredibly offensive "funny web videos."

A 2002 Nation article explained the influence and makeup of CSP (and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, its spiritual cousin). CSP's leaders were a team of hawks so intransigent that even Paul Wolfowitz and Karl Rove began to get uncomfortable with their influence during Bush's first term.

Funding for this wacky satire was brought to you by:

Gaffney's operation has always been a small one, about $1 million annually--funded largely by a series of grants from the conservative Olin, Bradley and various Scaife foundations, as well as some defense contractor money--but he's recently been able to underwrite a TV and print ad campaign holding that the Palestinians should be Enemy Number One in the War on Terror, still obsessed with the destruction of Israel. It's here that one sees the influence not of defense contractor money but of far-right Zionist dollars, including some from Irving Moskowitz, the California bingo magnate. A donor to both CSP and JINSA (as well as a JINSA director), Moskowitz not only sends millions of dollars a year to far-right Israeli settler groups like Ateret Cohanim but he has also funded the construction of settlements, having bought land for development in key Arab areas around Jerusalem. Moskowitz ponied up the money that enabled the 1996 reopening of a tunnel under the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif, which resulted in seventy deaths due to rioting.

Also financing Gaffney's efforts is New York investment banker Lawrence Kadish. A valued and valuable patron of both the Republican National Committee and George W. Bush, Kadish helps underwrite CSP as well as Americans for Victory Over Terrorism, an offshoot of conservative activist William Bennett's Empower America, on which he and Gaffney serve as "senior advisers" in the service of identifying "external" and "internal" post-9/11 threats to America. (The "internal" threats, as articulated by AVOT, include former President Jimmy Carter, Harper's editor Lewis Lapham and Representative Maxine Waters.) Another of Gaffney's backers is Poju Zabludowicz, heir to a formidable diversified international empire that includes arms manufacturer Soltam--which once employed Perle--and benefactor of the recently established Britain Israel Communication and Research Centre, a London-based group that appears to equate reportage or commentary uncomplimentary to Zionism with anti-Semitism.

.

.

I know it's a very controversial opinion, but perhaps the people charged with building and maintaining steadfast support of Israel among American Jews (and gentiles!) might try not being proudly violent racist nutcases who seem to cheer the death of their enemies and occasionally support the complete elimination of Arabs?

Let's face it. You hate Jews.

Edited February 8, 2011 by waldo

[Charles Anthony]

Guys,

Stop the personal attacks.

Just focus on the discussion or do not post in the thread.

Ch. A.

mod

[Sir Bandelot]

Guys,

Stop the personal attacks.

Just focus on the discussion or do not post in the thread.

Ch. A.

mod

People do seem to be rather pissed off at each other lately.

Must be all the snow