Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Well - maybe some day the planet will start paying attention to experts « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 6 7 8

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7034
Offline
« #105 : September 19, 2013, 12:32:43 PM »

Pumping 6 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, with continued deforestation, leaves it pretty obvious to me that human being are changing the climate.

This debate will never end, and people will rarely switch sides. It reminds me of the atheist vs Christianity arguments.

Apparently the IPCC has switched sides, and seeing they pretty much started the argument, should be considered pretty significant.

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
« #106 : September 22, 2013, 07:23:01 PM »

So when did the earth having severe droughts, blizzards, flash floods, and colder/warmer temperatures...

The last time that happend was the eocene epoch.

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
« #107 : September 22, 2013, 07:24:48 PM »

Still missing the big picture. Rainforests gone = Earth's carbon control system ineffective.

Yes that is an important part of carbon sequestration however,  wetlands are more important towards carbon sequestration due to the anoxic conditions.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #108 : September 22, 2013, 07:51:56 PM »

So when did the earth having severe droughts, blizzards, flash floods, and colder/warmer temperatures...

The last time that happend was the eocene epoch.
Dust Bowl, Mississippi River flooding has gone on forever and the Johnstown flood springs to mind as does the Great Flood on the west coast in the 1860's, flash floods were not invented in the last decade, warmer in the 1930's, cooler from the 1940's to the 1970's, warmer before and after...

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
« #109 : September 23, 2013, 12:53:52 AM »

So when did the earth having severe droughts, blizzards, flash floods, and colder/warmer temperatures...

The last time that happend was the eocene epoch.
Dust Bowl, Mississippi River flooding has gone on forever and the Johnstown flood springs to mind as does the Great Flood on the west coast in the 1860's, flash floods were not invented in the last decade, warmer in the 1930's, cooler from the 1940's to the 1970's, warmer before and after...

Those events are relatively mild compared to the Eocene epoch where there was extreme heating periods and glacial as well.

The Dust Bowl was human made catastrophe though and the Mississippi flooding is normal given the flood plains tend to be regulated by water tables nearby.  Flash floods are more extreme as the temperatures rise though because siliclastics tend to display different properties in the absence of water (acts like an impervious surface like human made roads and parking lots) and when a sudden surge of water shows up vegetation is no longer there to slow down the water due to the drought.

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #110 : September 23, 2013, 11:36:17 AM »

Yes they are - relatively mild by comparison.  The drought portion of the dust bowl was not influenced by humans, the severity of the crop loss leading to dust has been attributed to the farming methods of the day, but frankly I have to wonder about that attribution

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #111 : September 23, 2013, 03:25:54 PM »

http://www.masterresource.org/2013/09/climate-desperadoes-who-are-the-real-deniers/

Interesting article - especially if one clicks on the explanation of 97% of scientists...

Climate Desperadoes: The Real ‘Deniers’ (Part I)
by Paul Driessen
September 23, 2013

 “The real climate change ‘deniers’ are the alarmists who deny that natural forces still dominate weather and climate events, and refuse to acknowledge that thousands of scientists do not agree with IPCC proclamations and prescriptions.”

The old saws of climate alarmism getting increasingly desperate and intolerant in the face of contrary theoretical evidence and empirical anomalies.

The ad hominem attacks seem strange. Shouldn’t all good citizens of the earth be buoyed by the fact that yet another Malthusian-like alarm is becoming more and more implausible?

Shrilling, If Not Shilling

Al Gore is in full attack model, employing his “Climate Reality Project” to “Draw the Line on Denial,” even as he laid off 90% of the staff at his “Alliance for Climate Protection.” Greenpeace has joined the fray, launching a “Dealing in Doubt” campaign that blames ExxonMobil for funding the “global warming denial machine.”

ClimateProgress.org blogger Joe Romm faithfully echoes Greenpeace hysterics and blame-casting, even though the climate cataclysm cabal outspends the “deniers” by at least $1,000 to $1, and ExxonMobil hasn’t supported ‘skeptic’ groups for years.

President Obama continues to blame CO2-driven climate warming for tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires and droughts that are at the same level as (or lower than) they have been for many decades. His State Department is orchestrating climate treaties with island nations that contribute perhaps 0.1% of global carbon dioxide emissions – but the treaties could obligate the United States to severe and costly CO2 emission reductions that will drive up energy costs and strangle job creation and economic growth.

His Environmental Protection Agency is already doing exactly that. Rules proposed on September 20 would require all new coal-fired power plants to slash carbon dioxide emissions to 1,100 pounds per megawatt hour, some 700 pounds below what advanced modern units do today. The only way to do that is with expensive experimental technology that captures CO2 – and then figure out where to bury it.

Not to be outdone, some in Congress still want “carbon taxes” that the Energy Information Administration says will slash the average American family’s income by some $1,500 per year, on top of the $2,200 per year that the Washington Post says they’ve lost in buying power since 2008.

Wakan Tanka Propaganda

To help promote this agenda, a Canadian producer has recruited arch-environmentalist David Suzuki, “coal trains of death” climate catastrophist James Hansen, and former Haida Nation Council President Miles Richardson to present “the wisdom of our elders” on “the global climate crisis.” Her film’s title, “Wakan Tanka,” means “great spirit” or “great mystery” in Lakota, the language of Dakota (Sioux) Indians. Further fanning the flames, a ClimateWire story absurdly claims that “a warming climate has allowed blood-borne tropical diseases to flourish where once they were unheard of” – in European countries where malaria was endemic for centuries and was not wiped out until the early 1970s.

A more accurate description of Climate Armageddon is another Lakota phrase, tatonka chesli, meaning “big bull excrement.” Indeed, Australia’s newly elected Prime Minister, Tony Abbot, has said claims that humans are causing dangerous climate change are “complete crap.”

Mr. Abbot intends to scrap his country’s carbon dioxide cap-tax-and-trade law. EU industry leaders worry that Europe’s climate change and “green” energy policies are threatening “a systemic industrial massacre,” as soaring electricity and natural gas prices make companies less and less competitive in international markets. They want those policies changed and hydraulic fracturing to move forward. China, India and other major CO2 emitters absolutely refuse to set binding targets for reducing those emissions.

Who are the ‘Deniers’ Now?

We “skeptics” and “deniers” have never questioned the reality of climate change. We know global warming, global cooling and climate change are “real,” and have been throughout Earth’s history. What we deny are assertions that human CO2 emissions have replaced the complex solar, planetary and cosmic forces that caused previous changes, and that what we are experiencing now is unprecedented and likely to be catastrophic. What we insist on is solid evidence that alarmist claims have merit.

We believe in the scientific method. Hypotheses, assertions, models, and scary scenarios must be supported by actual evidence before citizen voters can be expected to turn to government to hogtie energy systems and lower their living standards. Up to now they have presented no such evidence.

The real climate change ‘deniers’ are the alarmists who deny that natural forces still dominate weather and climate events, and refuse to acknowledge that thousands of scientists do not agree with IPCC proclamations and prescriptions. 31,500 American scientists have signed the Oregon Petition dismissing fears of “catastrophic” global warming and climate disruption; over 1,000 international scientists dissent from manmade global warming claims. Claims of a “97% consensus” with the IPCC are pure baloney.

————

Part II tomorrow will overview the just-released Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science, which makes a compelling case against IPCC-blessed hypotheses, models, and scares have no basis in reality.

- See more at: http://www.masterresource.org/2013/09/climate-desperadoes-who-are-the-real-deniers/#sthash.B0QBL0aQ.dpuf

In case some don't want to go to the site and open the link - here is an explanation of the 97% of scientists that I hadn't heard before....

97% of scientists say manmade climate change is real. How can you go against them?
The claim that “97% of scientists agree” is based on 77 anonymous scientists who responded to a an online survey. The survey started by seeking opinions from 10,257 scientists. However, the survey authors selectively whittled down the responses to just 77 scientists.  So the 97% “consensus” claim is not based on thousands of scientists or even hundreds of scientists – but 75 out of only 77 scientists. Thus, the oft repeated 97 percent “consensus’ is based on only 75 anonymous scientists.

Yet, on this basis some say we should tax and eliminate hydrocarbon use, severely restricting U.S. job creation and economic growth.

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3797
Offline
« #112 : September 23, 2013, 03:45:36 PM »

People never learn. Remember the "40% of guns are purchased without a background check" we heard from the Prez and many others? Turns out it was based on a 20 year old phone survey where a few hundred people answered the question as to whether firearms they had acquired (not bought) had been subjected to a background check. Over 64% percent said yes. So to get the numbers they wanted, they added all the 'no' votes, added the 'probably not' votes, too, and then counted the 'probably yes' votes as no. They totaled 35.7% which was then rounded up to 40%.

People are still quoting that figure as fact to this day.

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #113 : September 23, 2013, 04:03:39 PM »

Didn't know that one... amazing what folks will do in the effort to further an argument

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #114 : September 23, 2013, 04:34:08 PM »

Here's another from the same site -

Global average temperatures are accelerating. We must act now to cool the planet.
Actually, global temperatures have been holding steady for more than a decade. 1998 is still the high point in global temperatures during the recent era. While 2005 and 2010 were both declared “hottest” years by global warming proponents, a closer examination revealed that the claims were “based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree Fahrenheit.” In other words, global temperatures have held very steady with no sign of “acceleration.”

In September 2012, even UN IPCC scientist Phil Jones presented data that revealed there has been no global temperature change for the last 16 years!

And this

Weren’t this summer’s heat waves unprecedented? We can't let that happen again.
Climatologist Dr. John Christy rejected such claims in testimony to Congress in September 2012: “The recent claims about thousands of new record high temperatures were based on stations whose length-of-record could begin as recently as 1981, thus missing the many heat waves of the 20th century. So, any moderately hot day now will be publicized as setting records for these young stations because they were not operating in the 1930s,” Christy said.

“About 75% of the states recorded their hottest temperature prior to 1955, and over 50 percent of the states experienced their record cold temperatures after 1940,” Christy pointed out.

One more - then folks can opt to check out the site... or not

Arctic ice melted to record lows in 2012. Isn’t that due to manmade global warming?
Recent Arctic ice changes are not “proof” of manmade global warming, nor are they unprecedented, unusual or cause for alarm, according to experts and multiple peer-reviewed studies. After weeks of media hype blaming global warming, NASA finally admitted in September 2012 that an August Arctic cyclone “broke up” and “wreaked havoc” on sea ice. According to NASA: “The cyclone remained stalled over the arctic for several days … pushing [sea ice] south to warmer waters, where it melted.”

Reuters news finally reported that the Arctic storm played a “key role” in ice reduction, and multiple peer-reviewed studies have shown that low Arctic summer ice seasons are due to high pressure days, unusual winds and shifts in ocean currents – not to global warming.

Global warming activists have long hyped satellite era data, which begin in1979, to claim record low Arctic sea ice – while ignoring the satellite data that show record sea ice expansion in the Antarctic. Moreover, satellite monitoring of Arctic ice began at the end of a 40-year cold cycle (remember the 1970s fears of a coming ice age?), when ice was probably at its highest extent in the modern era.

We have had similar Arctic ice panics in the past. A November 2, 1922 Washington Post article was headlined “Arctic Ocean getting warm: Seals vanish and icebergs melt.” The Arctic Ocean is warming, icebergs are growing scarcer and in places the seals are finding the water too hot, it said.
« : September 23, 2013, 04:36:43 PM dbucfan »

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #115 : September 26, 2013, 05:44:40 PM »

But wait, there's more

EPA admits new coal regulations won't reduce global warming | WashingtonExaminer.com   9/26/13 5:40 PM
EPA admits new coal regulations won't reduce global warming
BY ASHE SCHOW | SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 AT 3:35 PM

An Environmental Protection Agency proposal designed to reduce CO2 emissions and reduce global warming will actually have no “notable CO2 emission changes.”
So, a rule that will essentially ban new coal-fired power plants will actually have no impact on global warming. Got it.
“The EPA does not anticipate that this proposed rule will result in notable CO2 emission changes, energy impacts, monetized benefits, costs, or economic impacts by 2022,” the EPA writes under the comments section of its proposal.

The EPA also admits that “the owners of newly built electric generating units will likely choose technologies that meet these standards even in the absence of this proposal due to existing economic conditions as EPA admits new coal regulations won't reduce global warming normal business practice.”

So, a rule that will make it nearly impossible to built an effective, new coal plant wasn’t even necessary in the first place? The rule has nothing but downsides.
What’s interesting is that in the paragraph immediately preceding the admission that the regulation will do nothing, EPA claimed that the rule would “contribute to the actions required to slow or reverse the accumulation of [greenhouse gas] concentrations in the atmosphere.”

But if the rule does absolutely nothing, how does it contribute to reducing global warming?

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy gave the answer last week, saying that this proposed rule, along with the Obama administration's other global warming rules, “positions the U.S. for leadership on this issue.” That, she said, would “prompt and leverage international discussions and actions.”

Lisa Miller, spokeswoman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, said that the EPA’s “piecemeal” approach to global warming is an “ineffective and expensive way to reduce CO2 emissions.”

She added that “without comparable actions by other countries to reduce emissions, the U.S. is at a competitive disadvantage.”

The EPA’s rule appears to not actually be about impacting global warming, but all about making the U.S. look good on the issue in the EPA admits new coal regulations won't reduce global warming | international community. That, and the elimination of coal.

“Even if the entire U.S. coal fleet was somehow eliminated, the decrease in projected sea level rise would be less than the thickness of a dime,” Miller said.
Web URL: http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2536384
http://washingtonexaminer.com/epa-admits-new-coal-regulations-w...?utm_campaign=Fox%20News&utm_source=foxnews.com&utm_medium=feed

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #116 : September 30, 2013, 06:17:20 PM »

It's like every day someone comes out with an opinion varying with advocates of Man Made, or just plain old Global Warming -


A project of CFACT Support Climate Depot
 
MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Rips UN IPCC Report: ‘The latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence’ — ‘It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going’


Former UN IPCC Lead Author Richard Lindzen: 'In attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about'

By: Marc Morano - Climate DepotSeptember 28, 2013 12:34 AM

Climate Depot Exclusive
MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen told Climate Depot on September 27, 2013:
I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence.  They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.
Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean.  However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans.  However, it is this heat transport that plays a major role in natural internal variability of climate, and the IPCC assertions that observed warming can be attributed to man depend crucially on their assertion that these models accurately simulate natural internal variability.  Thus, they now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified.
Finally, in attributing warming to man, they fail to point out that the warming has been small, and totally consistent with there being nothing to be alarmed about.  It is quite amazing to see the contortions the IPCC has to go through in order to keep the international climate agenda going.
End Lindzen statement
Lindzen is an emeritus Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT.
Lindzen has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. He was a lead author of Chapter 7, ‘Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,’ of the IPCC Third Assessment Report on climate change.
Related Links:
Climate Depot Round Up: UN IPCC Exhumes, Brings Climate Catastrophe Back From The Grave…Politicians, Activists Dancing Like It’s 2007!
UN IPCC Report Exposed By Its Own Members as ‘a pure political process’ — ‘Scientific truth isn’t negotiated in the dead of night behind closed doors’ — Climate Depot Round Up
‘Gambling’ Climate Scientists Could Be Left Red-Faced As They Bet On Warming Soon
Judith Curry: IPCC Will Be ‘Toast’ If It Doesn’t Warm Soon
TheGWPF: David Whitehouse: ‘IPCC talking like bankers, or like bankers did pre 2008.’
UN climate report glosses over 15 years without global warming — Daily Caller Features Climate Depot:
Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry on new UN IPCC report: ‘Oh, my aching head’ — Curry: ‘I have no idea what goes on in the sausage factory.  95% – take it with a grain of salt (or a stiff whiskey).  That’s their story, and they’re sticking to it.’
For alternative to UN claims, see: CLIMATE STUDY COUNTERS UN IPCC: EVIDENCE LEANS AGAINST HUMAN-CAUSED GLOBAL WARMING — Group of 50 international scientists releases comprehensive new 1200-page report
 

Filed under: climate depot, consensus buster, ipcc, mediacd, mkey, new study, ocean cooling, ocean warming, un

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #117 : September 30, 2013, 06:22:39 PM »

And if one goes to the link - Al Gore still feels he is right.  Ignore all those scientists whose articles are listed surrounding the link to Al's....

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #118 : September 30, 2013, 06:54:20 PM »

Monday, Sep 30 2013 12AM  77°F 3AM 73°F 5-Day Forecast
Met Office proof that global warming is still 'on pause' as climate summit confirms global temperature has stopped rising

The Mail on Sunday first revealed global temperature pause a year ago
IPCC report confirms no significant rise in global temperature since 1997
IPCC accused of sinking to 'hilarious level of incoherence'
But the IPCC insists 2016-2035 will be 0.3-0.7C hotter than 1986-2005
By DAVID ROSE

PUBLISHED: 17:24 EST, 28 September 2013 | UPDATED: 04:35 EST, 29 September 2013

The global warming ‘pause’ has now lasted for almost 17 years and shows no sign of ending – despite the unexplained failure of climate scientists’ computer models to predict it.

The Mail on Sunday has also learnt that because 2013 has been relatively cool, it is very likely that by the end of this year, world average temperatures will have crashed below the ‘90 per cent probability’ range projected by the models.

These also provide the main basis for the sweeping forecasts of a perilous, hotter world in a new report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The graph above covers the period June 1997 to July 2013. It was drawn using the official Met Office ‘HadCRUT4’ monthly data for world average temperatures, and shows the lack of a warming trend.

It updates the chart The Mail on Sunday published a year ago, which first made the pause headline news and forced the IPCC to discuss it.

ICE EXPERTS' MILLION KM BLUNDER
America's official source of information on polar ice caps got its figure for a dramatic recovery in 2013 Arctic sea ice out by a million square kilometres – then quietly corrected its mistake without mentioning it.

On September 4, the NASA-funded National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC), based at the University of Colorado, stated on its website that in August 2013 the Arctic ice cover recovered by a record 2.38 million sq km – 919,000 sq miles – from its 2012 low.

News of this figure was widely reported – including in this newspaper on September 8.

But on September 10, the NSIDC quietly changed it to 1.38 million sq km (533,000 sq miles) – and replaced the original document so the old figure no longer shows up on a main Google search.

It can now only  be found on an old ‘cached’ page.

Prompted by an inquiry from ‘green’ blogger Bob Ward, the NSIDC’s spokeswoman Natasha Vizcarra said the mistake was a ‘typographical error’, telling him: ‘There are no plans to make a statement on the change because it was not an error in the data.’

While 2013 remains the sixth lowest Arctic sea ice year since 1979, forthcoming research suggests the long-term melting trend is partly cyclical, and may have begun a reversal.

A footnote in the new report also confirms there has been no statistically significant increase since 1997.

Last night independent climate scientist Nic Lewis – an accredited IPCC reviewer and co-author of peer-reviewed papers – pointed out that taking start years of 2001, 2002 or 2003 would suggest a cooling trend of 0.02-0.05C per decade, though this would not be statistically significant.

At a press conference to launch the report in Stockholm, the IPCC refused to say how long the pause would have to go on before casting doubt on the models, suggesting trends were only meaningful if they lasted 30 years. But some of the report’s authors are less confident.

Piers Forster, Leeds University’s Professor of Physical Climate Change, told The Mail on Sunday: ‘If it does get beyond 20 years, that would get very interesting.

'We would have to revisit the models. As it goes on, it would get more and more peculiar.’

He added: ‘We are right on the edge of the probability distribution now. We have to accept that if we are going to come up with projections, they have to be correct.’

Even this marks a big change from earlier statements by eminent climate scientists.

In 2009, Professor Phil Jones, head of the East Anglia University Climatic Research Unit, said in a leaked ‘Climategate’ email: ‘Bottom line: the no upward trend has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’

However, not only does the report deny the importance of the pause, it makes a firm, short-term forecast that it is about to end – claiming that the period 2016-2035 will, on average, be 0.3-0.7C hotter than 1986-2005.

That, said Prof Judith Curry, head of climate science at the Georgia Institute of Technology, is a high-risk strategy: ‘The IPCC has thrown down the gauntlet.’

Should the pause continue, she said, ‘they are toast’.

She was critical about the report’s statement that confidence humans had caused most of the warming of the 20th Century had increased from 90 per cent in the last IPCC report in 2007 to 95 per cent.

‘How they can justify this is beyond me.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2436710/Met-office-proof-global-warming-pause-climate-summit-confirms-global-temperature-stopped-rising.html#ixzz2gQ2mohOy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

I know this is piling on - but the extent of the 'misstatements' is stunning

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46179
Offline
« #119 : October 01, 2013, 05:00:41 PM »

Too much at one sitting - I get it...

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant
  Page: 1 ... 6 7 8
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Well - maybe some day the planet will start paying attention to experts « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools