It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Climate "Deniers" Winning the War

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   

“We are winning the war,” was a phrase I heard repeatedly this week.

Congressman Sensenbrenner, Vice Chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, recounted:

“When I last spoke, the House of Representatives was poised to pass the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill; the United Nations was promising the extension and expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and President Obama was touting Spain as our model for a massive increase in renewable energy subsidies.

Three years later, cap-and-tax is dead; the Kyoto Protocol is set to expire; and Spain recently announced that it eliminated new renewable energy subsidies.”

Link


Its good to see the greenies not being allowed to waste everyone esle's money.




edit on 31-5-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino


“We are winning the war,” was a phrase I heard repeatedly this week.

Congressman Sensenbrenner, Vice Chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, said: “We won on these issues because we were right.”

He recounted: “When I last spoke, the House of Representatives was poised to pass the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill; the United Nations was promising the extension and expansion of the Kyoto Protocol; and President Obama was touting Spain as our model for a massive increase in renewable energy subsidies.

Three years later, cap-and-tax is dead; the Kyoto Protocol is set to expire; and Spain recently announced that it eliminated new renewable energy subsidies.”

Link


Its good to see the greenies not being allowed to waste everyone esle's money.




Oh, they will find another way



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Its appears that 'green' energy companies are going to the wall.

The worldwide crash of green energy companies




The RENIXX Index of the 30 largest renewable energy companies in the world is trading at an all-time low today and has lost over 90% of its value since 2008.

A partial listing of green energy companies that have already filed bankruptcy or are teetering on the brink is below. Many of these companies were financed by taxpayers.

Filed Bankruptcy:

Solyndra
Beacon Power
Ener1
Range Fuels
Solar Trust of America
Spectrawatt
Evergreen Solar
Eastern Energy
Unisolar
Bright Automotive
Olson's Crop Service
Energy Conversion Devices
Sovello
Siag
Solon
Q-Cells
Mountain Plaza

Teetering on the Brink:

Abound Solar
A123 Systems
Brightsource Energy
Fisker Automotive
First Solar
Nevada Geothermal
SunPower
Nordex
The Bard Group
Amonix
NRG Energy
Alterra Power
Enel Green Power
Sunpower Corp

Link


Its a good thing that 'green' companies (which largely exist to syphon off large amounts of taxpayers money into their own pockets) are going out of business.




edit on 31-5-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Though I believe it was handled wrong, I truely hope we dont give up on green energy. Wheather you believe in peak oil are not we all must realize that new energies must be sought for a growing population. And any reduction in pollution is a bonus. It did not need to be subsidized with all the goverment money but it is a help to our future.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 





Its good to see the greenies not being allowed to waste everyone esle's money.


When you say "greenies" who do you mean?

Of course there are politicians who will pervert the Green cause and use it for their own private enterprises and causes. But there are many more who deeply care about the environment and the world we live in.

So i ask again, who are you referring to?

Do you not think its unfair and rude to just swat a whole group of people aside with simplistic label that throws them all in the same box?

Its so easy to label and stereotype a whole group of people... regardless of if its race, religion, sex, politics or environmental beliefs.

I am not a greenie (which is often said in the same tone of malice as people used against “them Hippies” in the 60’s and 70’s)
I am someone who cares deeply about the environment and I am extremely concerned about the state of the planet. How people can place the economy above ecology is beyond me



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muckster
When you say "greenies" who do you mean?


There is a big list of them above.


Originally posted by Muckster
Do you not think its unfair and rude to just swat a whole group of people aside with simplistic label that throws them all in the same box?


Like 'climate deniers'?


Originally posted by Muckster
I am someone who cares deeply about the environment and I am extremely concerned about the state of the planet. How people can place the economy above ecology is beyond me


The problem is, the evidence that climate change is man made just isn't there.


Whether or not the documentable climate change—cooler in the seventies, warmer in the nineties, stable for the last decade (just to point out some recent changes)—is due to the sun or the sea, or myriad other causes, the key take away is that the science is not settled.

Link


No one is sure what is causing climate change.

That hasn't stopped a whole 'green' industry popping up that is dedicated to 'fixing' a problem that they don't understand.

Using taxpayers money of course.



edit on 31-5-2012 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Muckster
When you say "greenies" who do you mean?


There is a big list of them above.


Originally posted by Muckster
Do you not think its unfair and rude to just swat a whole group of people aside with simplistic label that throws them all in the same box?


Like 'climate deniers'?

Its so easy to label and stereotype a whole group of people... regardless of if its race, religion, sex, politics or environmental beliefs.


Originally posted by Muckster
I am someone who cares deeply about the environment and I am extremely concerned about the state of the planet. How people can place the economy above ecology is beyond me


The problem is, the evidence that climate change is man made just isn't there.


Whether or not the documentable climate change—cooler in the seventies, warmer in the nineties, stable for the last decade (just to point out some recent changes)—is due to the sun or the sea, or myriad other causes, the key take away is that the science is not settled.

Link


No one is sure what is causing climate change.

That hasn't stopped a whole 'green' industry popping up that is dedicated to 'fixing' a problem that they don't understand.




Exactly, our whole galaxy is changing and their solution is to tax everyone more and tell meat eaters they are murderers. The world is sick and so is the sun



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


But it goes beyond climate change. Put that to the side for a moment and tell me we are not polluting the crap out of this planet. Where is our drinking water going to come from in 30 years? Sewage recycle plants like some countries are experimenting with. What are you going to drive in 20 years? Yes there will be gas but at what price? Yes our guberment wasted money. What else is new. They would pay 20 dollars for a brown paper bag. But that does not mean we can give up.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
I don't deny the climate is changing. However, I believe it is always changing and man is not the cause.

In fact, I recently read a fascinating article that charged that Climate Change caused the decline of a massive civilization in India dating back about 3200BC. What SUVs and grills and coal burning plants were they using back then?

During the 1990s our temps here on Earth were rising, but they were also rising on our neighboring planets also? Again, what SUVs and grills and coal burning plants were "they" using on Mars?

Nope... I believe it was and is Solar Cycles.

That being said, I support "Green" efforts... to preserve our planet and resources, not because of man made climate change. However, the "Green" industries need to be able to support theirselves in the open market, not with government subsidies. "Green" industries need to find, develope, and market a product or service that can compete in the open market place...

How about easy to install solar power units... sell them at WalMart...49.99. Mobile solar generators...199.99... mobile, lightweight, quiet... just set up, unfold panel, plug up the TV or radio or laptop... perfect for campers, emergency situations, power outages... stuff like that.

How about a solar power cell that you can see through... like a window from inside, but a solar cell on the outside... replace those old fashioned windows and turn your sky scraper into a giant solar panel... don't buy electricity ever again. How about that?

How about solar power units designed to fit atop wooden fence posts... plug/string them together and supply the electrical needs of the rural farm...think about it... thousands of fence posts over tens of hundreds of acres. Every fence line becomes a power generator... infact, so much could be produced... the power company buys it back from the farmer. This becomes another 'crop" the farmer can sell....

This what the "Green" industries need to develope... make something people want. Something that makes people go...Wow, I need one of those... and it's affordable too.

Until then,green versus coal and gas will be the same as eating salads versus cheeseburgers on the Dollar Menu... we all know we need more salads, but it costs twice as much as the dollar bacon cheesburger... and they taste so good... and cheap too.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 





There is a big list of them above.


Are you referring to the list of companies that have gone bust? So is that who you are talking about when you say greenies? Just that small list?




Like 'climate deniers'?


“Climate deniers” is a specific term used to describe people who deny anthropogenic climate change. “Greenies” encapsulates everyone who cares about the environment and nature. It has, in my opinion, been turned into a derogatory phrase, used as an insult, to people who are environmentally conscious. You do realise that there is more to environmentalism than just climate change? Besides, can you show me where i have used the phrase “climate deniers”?




The problem is, the evidence that climate change is man made just isn't there.


Well, maybe you are looking at different evidence to me. And even if true, you don’t think that “green” tech has its place in this world? Even with climate change out of the picture fossil fuels are still harmful.

Oil spills in the ocean, repertory disorders from emissions, shale fracking for gas, pollution of the water table from drilling... the list is almost endless... yet you bask in glory because some "green" companies are going under and people are turning away from this tech??




No one is sure what is causing climate change.

That hasn't stopped a whole 'green' industry popping up that is dedicated to 'fixing' a problem that they don't understand.


As i just explained, of course there are people that will exploit and corrupt "green" tech. But do you honestly believe the fossil fuel industry is squeaky clean? You don’t think that they have politicians in their pocket and cause mass hardship around the world??

Sorry but this attitude stinks... what the oil, gas and coal companies have done around the world is absolutely criminal. From the polluting of farmland in the Niger Delta to the spilling of oil in the gulf. Their crimes are enormous and far outweigh the pathetic arguments thrown at the green industries.

It seems that people are only happy if their choice of power supplier is killing people on the other side of the world rather than costing them a few pennies more in their pocket.

Just to clarify... Climate change is not the only issue on the average environmentalists mind.

Peace



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
if it fits,,
Cape Breton,,Heads Up.

Burl,,/Beryle

on its way again,,,anyone in Cape Breton remember it ?



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muckster
...
I am someone who cares deeply about the environment and I am extremely concerned about the state of the planet. How people can place the economy above ecology is beyond me


I am sorry, but if you were someone really concerned about the environment, and the planet, you would inform yourself and find out that atmospheric CO2 is not the "evil thing" that environlunatics have made it to be.

There are real toxic gases being released in the atmosphere, toxic chemicals being released in rivers and oceans, yet what is the gas that the whole environmental movement decided to go after?... the ONE gas that is truly benefitial for ALL LIFE ON EARTH...

If so called "environmentalists" were really that concerned about the environment, and the planet, as well as for people, they would leave the whole Anthropogenic Global Warming camp behind them and instead would focus on enforcing laws to countries that are the worst offenders to the environment... Countries like China, which the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) camp wanted to allow to continue their destruction of the environment, and even allow them to continue and even increase their release of the "evil CO2", alongside real toxic chemicals and gases under the Kyoto Protocol, and other similar bills...

If you were truly an environmentalist, you should be THRILLED that atmospheric CO2 content has been increasing.



Quantifying effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment on stomatal conductance and evapotranspiration of water hyacinth via infrared thermometry ☆
S.B. Idso,
B.A. Kimball,
K.L. Clawson
U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, 4331 East Broadway, Phoenix, AZ 85040 U.S.A.
Received 4 January 1984. Accepted 2 April 1984. Available online 15 April 2003.



Abstract

Measurements of stomatal conductance and evaporative water loss from two tanks of water hyacinths growing at Phoenix, AZ, one under ambient conditions and one considerably enriched in atmospheric CO2, are reported. Stomatal conductances of plants in the CO2-enriched treatment were reduced to values half as great as those of plants in the ambient treatment at a mean mid-day CO2 concentration of 550 ppm, which resulted in a 22% decrease in total evaporative water loss; while in going from an ambient CO2 concentration of 310 ppm to a doubled concentration of 620 ppm there was a 27% decrease in evaporative water loss. Both of these physiological responses were well characterized by the Idso—Jackson plant water stress index. Additionally, it was found that the stomatal response to increasing atmospheric CO2 was identical to that induced by removing water from the plant roots, and that the reduction in evaporative water loss with increasing atmospheric CO2 was an inverse linear function of the plant water stress index — both of which phenomena had previously been theorized but never before experimentally verified.



Contribution from the Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

www.sciencedirect.com...


If you don't understand what the above means it means that with much higher levels of atmospheric CO2 plants use less water, and less water is wasted, which leaves more water for humans and animals. With much higher levels of atmospheric CO2 than exist now all plant life makes better use of water and waste less water.

Not only that but also...



...
Successful indoor growers implement methods to increase CO2 concentrations in their enclosure. The typical outdoor air we breathe contains 0.03 - 0.045% (300 - 450 ppm) CO2. Research demonstrates that optimum growth and production for most plants occur between 1200 - 1500 ppm CO2. These optimum CO2 levels can boost plant metabolism, growth and yield by 25 - 60%.
.......

www.planetnatural.com...

Right now atmospheric CO2 is at around 380 -390ppm.... yet we are to believe that "THE EARTH IS DYING" because of that when we know for a fact that levels of atmospheric CO2 at 1,200ppm and even 1,500ppm are in fact beneficial to all of nature?... Not to mention the fact that it is also beneficial for mankind and the animal kingdom since higher levels of atmospheric CO2 than exists now increases plant growth and yield which means MORE FOOD...



edit on 1-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



Sadly many people are caught up in just the CO2 argument. There is more than just CO2 being released into the environment... i do realise that.

What you don’t seem to get though is that if the world was in the same state as it was a few thousand years ago (most of Europe covered in forest and the Amazon untouched) it probably wouldn’t be too much of a big deal.

However, we don’t have the lush green forests and jungles we once had thanks to agriculture, logging and urban sprawl. So it is becoming more and more necessary for the oceans to suck up the excess. This causes Ocean Acidification and this is potential harmful to the entire biosphere. Without healthy oceans this planets ability to sustain us is severely jeopardised.

You seem to have a Bee in your bonnet about "Environmentalist" but you really don’t get the movement at all... you cherry pick what you want... Do you honestly believe that Environmentalist only go after CO2??!?!?

Sorry but you know that is junk... People like you will moan and use the same arguments whatever environmentalist speak about. Methane, VOC's, Heavy metals, Rare Earths, Toxic waste, Nuclear power, destruction of natural habitats, waste management, consumerism, etcetera etcetera...

These are things that weigh heavily (and rightly so) on the average environmentalist mind. I am PROUD to see myself as an environmentalist and, before you go lecturing me about everything i do harms the environment or use some other tired and worn out non-argument against me, I know I am NOT perfect. And that the difference between someone who care about the environment (because that’s all an environmentalist is) and someone who cares about money.

Do you care about the environment? Because if you do, you are an environmentalist at heart!



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Muckster
 


You are wrong in so many ways it is not even funny. The majority of the problems with ocean acidification does not come from CO2, but from the waste of real toxic chemicals that have been and continue to be released. There are MANY times in Earth's history when the level of atmospheric CO2 was much higher than now, yet the oceans were not acidic, and thee were no "mass die offs"...

You claim that we don't have the forests now that we had 1,000 years? well, you are again wrong. 1,000 years ago the Romans took out a lot more trees than we have in our modern world. In fact I have shown several times already that in several areas, including Europe and North America are greener than it used to be.


Rebecca Lindsey June 5, 2003

Leaving aside for a moment the deforestation and other land cover changes that continue to accompany an ever-growing human population, the last two decades of the twentieth century were a good time to be a plant on planet Earth. In many parts of the global garden, the climate grew warmer, wetter, and sunnier, and despite a few El Niño-related setbacks, plants flourished for the most part.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...

The Earth has in fact become GREENER since atmospheric CO2 levels began to once again increase...and atmospheric CO2 is not lethal to humans until it reaches 12% as an atmospheric gas.... it is right now at 0.0038%.....


And even if the Earth were to become warmer, this in fact is benefitial for all of mankind, as well as nature and the animal kingdom.


The first neotropical rainforest was home of the Titanoboa
Published: Monday, October 12, 2009 - 15:09 in Paleontology & Archaeology

Smithsonian researchers working in Colombia's Cerrejón coal mine have unearthed the first megafossil evidence of a neotropical rainforest. Titanoboa, the world's biggest snake, lived in this forest 58 million years ago at temperatures 3-5 C warmer than in rainforests today, indicating that rainforests flourished during warm periods. "Modern neotropical rainforests, with their palms and spectacular flowering-plant diversity, seem to have come into existence in the Paleocene epoch, shortly after the extinction of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago," said Carlos Jaramillo, staff scientist at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. "Pollen evidence tells us that forests before the mass extinction were quite different from our fossil rainforest at Cerrejón. We find new plant families, large, smooth-margined leaves and a three-tiered structure of forest floor, understory shrubs and high canopy."

esciencenews.com...

You see, atmospheric CO2 is not only good for grown trees, with higher levels than exist now in fact it would make all plant life, trees, and all green biomass grow faster, stronger, and gives more yields/harvests.

Your reasoning is flawed. I also care for the environment, but I also know that people like you don't know enough to make ANY decision in regards to the environment. There is no "balance and point of no return" these are only IMAGINED in the minds of people like you.

Yes, mankind has destroyed habitats, but going after CO2 and puting taxes on CO2 is not going to solve anything. It will only give more money to the rich socialist/fascist elites.

Perhaps you don't know it, but there are several Universities which have been working on ways to sequester atmospheric CO2. I found out about it because I was offered a job to work on one of these projects some years back.

I immediately wrote to my state Senators, and Representatives telling them how bad of an idea this is, and this will in fact make the world a WORSE place.

I gave proof of what will happen, and the response I've got was that no matter what, we had to reach a middle ground with the AGW camp, and that middle ground meant to implement plans like sequestering atmospheric CO2.

What people like you don't understand is that the atmospheric CO2 content on the Earth right now is LOW, it is not high. In fact for most of Earth's geological record atmospheric CO2 has been at least 3 times higher than now, and up to 8 times higher.

What will happen with all these programs to sequester atmospheric CO2 is that plants, trees, and all green biomass will be stunt. They won't have enough atmospheric CO2 to grow, or to give more, or any yield and in fact there will be more mass starvation worldwide.

What people like you don't get is that this is exactly part of the plan the global socialist/fascist elites have in mind. This is one way to reduce the population of the world, by bringing more widespread starvation.

But you go ahead and celebrate this if you want...

edit on 2-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   


You are wrong in so many ways it is not even funny. The majority of the problems with ocean acidification does not come from CO2, but from the waste of real toxic chemicals that have been and continue to be released. There are MANY times in Earth's history when the level of atmospheric CO2 was much higher than now, yet the oceans were not acidic, and thee were no "mass die offs"...



No i'm afraid you are...

Yes there was a time in earths history when CO2 levels were higher... a few million years ago when life was suited to it... Plants and Animals that exist today have evolved to exist in the current conditions... During the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum earth CO2 and methane levels spiked causing an abrupt (over a few thousand years) temperature increase of about 5oc. This caused a mass die off in the oceans and the earth witnessed another major extinction!

palaeontologyonline

Also, regarding Ocean acidification...

The oceans currently absorb approximately half of the CO2 produced by burning fossil fuel; put simply, climate change would be far worse if it were not for the oceans. However, there is a cost to the oceans - when CO2 dissolves in seawater it forms carbonic acid and as more CO2 is taken up by the oceans surface, the pH decreases, moving towards a less alkaline and therefore more acidic state.
oceanacidification

And then you say...



You claim that we don't have the forests now that we had 1,000 years? well, you are again wrong. 1,000 years ago the Romans took out a lot more trees than we have in our modern world. In fact I have shown several times already that in several areas, including Europe and North America are greener than it used to be.


But even your own source starts the quote with...

"Leaving aside for a moment the deforestation and other land cover changes that continue to accompany an ever-growing human population"

Yet you choose to ignore this!!! Sorry but you are either mad or completely agenda driven to believe that the earth is greener now than it was a few thousand years ago... which moves me on to my next point...

I said...

"What you don’t seem to get though is that if the world was in the same state as it was a few thousand years ago (most of Europe covered in forest and the Amazon untouched) "

You see that? A "FEW" thousand years ago!!!

But then you miss quote me and put words in my mouth...



You claim that we don't have the forests now that we had 1,000 years?


Er... no I didn’t!! I said a few thousand years...

But that’s still besides the point... what do you think happened after the Romans chopped down the trees? You think they just grew back??? You don’t think that humans took advantage of the new fertile land for agriculture???

And again you quote reference to how life flourished 58million years ago... you do realise that he plants and creatures that existed then were very different?


You see, atmospheric CO2 is not only good for grown trees, with higher levels than exist now in fact it would make all plant life, trees, and all green biomass grow faster, stronger, and gives more yields/harvests.
Your reasoning is flawed. I also care for the environment, but I also know that people like you don't know enough to make ANY decision in regards to the environment. There is no "balance and point of no return" these are only IMAGINED in the minds of people like you.


CO2 is good for growing trees is like saying Oxygen is good for growing humans... True to an extent, but too much of a good thing!

If you cared for the environment you wouldn’t have such an entrenched stubborn opinion that relies on fabrication and miss-quotes when arguing with someone. You have blatantly lied about what i have said and in my opinion this shows you as a fraud.

People like me? Please....



Yes, mankind has destroyed habitats, but going after CO2 and puting taxes on CO2 is not going to solve anything. It will only give more money to the rich socialist/fascist elites.


Yes because keeping fossil fuels burning will liberate the poor and grab the power from the elites




What people like you don't get is that this is exactly part of the plan the global socialist/fascist elites have in mind. This is one way to reduce the population of the world, by bringing more widespread starvation.

But you go ahead and celebrate this if you want


Sorry but what you don’t get is that it is these ultra capitalist/fascist elites who are trying to cling onto to the old cash cow of fossil fuel.

You keep repeating, people like me?

People like you perhaps?



edit on 2-6-2012 by Muckster because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-6-2012 by Muckster because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 05:16 AM
link   
Yeah lets beat this Socialist /fascist agenda by cutting down rain forests to create grazing land for Cattle for McDonlads burgers. That'll show those tree hugging lefties. Let's pump more crap into the oceans, dig deeper for Oil, increase the size of the island created by plastic and trash in the ocean. This is the only way we can bring these Leftist/marxist fascists to their knees.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
Muckster, woody

I take my hat off to you Gentlemen, unfortunately I fear political idealogy and finacial gain takes precedence over concern for the well being and care of the earth and it's environment.
edit on 2/6/12 by Freeborn because: Oops



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn
Muckster, woody

I take my hat off to you Gentlemen, unfortunately I fear political idealogy and finacial gain takes precedence over concern for the well being and care of the earth and it's environment.
edit on 2/6/12 by Freeborn because: Oops


I fear that finacial gain hijacks the attempts to care for the earth and it's environment.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


So it would seem.......but at what cost?



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 


I truly wish we were winning the war.
The climate nutters are weaving a web so tight its insane. A couple of days ago I read an article about Driveless Cars. It was dripping with the enviroment, climate change religon.

One doner link led me to another, for instance, Energy Foundation, Worldwatch Institute, UN Foundation, ACSF (American Clean Skies Foundation), william and Flora Foundation, oh and Green Car Congress.

They want to control our transportation among so many other things in our life.
When we can install a toilet or light bulb in our homes without fear of being fined, or know this isn't being taught to our children, then I'd feel more like we're winning the war. All I know is I'm not ready to throw in the towel and never will be.
I truly care about our planet, I respect mother nature and her fury but I don't worship her and place her above man as the extremist tree huggers expect.

They're taking over the world : (
Edit to add, its draining our wallets just as they planned.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join