New Study: Global Warming, Not ‘Natural Cycles,’ Played Major Role in 2005 Hurricane Season
New Study: Global Warming, Not ‘Natural Cycles,’ Played Major Role in 2005 Hurricane Season
The 2005 North Atlantic hurricane season was the most active in recorded history, and caused an unprecedented level of damage.
Now, in the second major global warming study released today, the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) has found:
Global warming accounted for around half of the extra hurricane-fueling warmth in the waters of the tropical North Atlantic in 2005, while natural cycles were only a minor factor.
… The study contradicts recent claims that natural cycles are responsible for the upturn in Atlantic hurricane activity since 1995. It also adds support to the premise that hurricane seasons will become more active as global temperatures rise.
Some background: Last year, sea-surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic “were a record 1.7° F above the 1901-1970 average.”
Previous studies had suggested that the more intense hurricane activity was largely due to a 60-to-80-year natural cycle in sea-surface temperatures. But according to the study released today, less than .2° F of the rise was due to this natural cycle. Global warming, on the other hand, caused roughly half (about 0.8° F) of the rise, more than any other factor.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
68 Responses to “New Study: Global Warming, Not ‘Natural Cycles,’ Played Major Role in 2005 Hurricane Season”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I knew that already.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:40 pmHmm, I wonder what Faux news will say.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:40 pmWho care about a bunch of poor black people. Let them drown!
All that matters is that I get my campaign contribution from Big Oil, and Big Industry.
How else can I pay for those swift boat commercials.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:41 pmIf your tuned into the environment, nature, and have a general awareness of things outside of the world of concrete and air conditioning, its obvious that warmer oceans, caused by global warming, have caused larger hurricanes. And yes, a category of 6 will have to be invented to describe storms we will be seeing.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:43 pmI commend the effort to educate the masses but please be aware that for the true non-believers you might as well be addressing the Flat Earth Society. As we have seen in the past, they read nothing and have no belief in science facts or discoveries.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:45 pmdoes al gore know about this? quick? get the phone...
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:47 pmI'll tell you what - I have been noticing it because I pay attention. The naysayers don't tune in to mother earth because they don't respect her. Period. They think that the eden they know from the bible is somewhere 'up there' and don't recognize it being right here on this very planet, so they don't care. With that said, I have noticed in the last five years the difference in the climate where I live. The weeds in my garden are proof positive. Where we would freeze every winter, we have not in FIVE years. I have annual plants that have never died - for going on three years now. I saw marigolds blooming at Christmas! I will never again have the chance to ice skate on frozen ponds again.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:49 pmI am preemtively responding to the next thread about Cheney saying pulling out of Iraq will be the worst thing. Mr. Cheney, wouldn't you being impeached be the worst thing? (for you that is).
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:50 pmSome people will always look at the temperature increases and think they are small, but think about how much energy it takes to heat up a pan of water. Then think of how much energy it takes to heat up a whole ocean or planet; all that extra energy in the system can create big changes...
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:52 pmMadashell,
I have noticed similar changes over the course of the last 20 years.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:52 pmMike, good point.
Small increases in ocean temp can release huge amounts of energy in the form of weaher systems. By the time the warming is indeniable, it will be too late for many, and for others they will continue the denial no matter what. The dead-end deniers will attribute the problems to the rapture or something.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:55 pmGod,
I sure hope Al Gore runs in '08 so he can have all of this crap fixed!
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:57 pmHere's how I always see the "Fair Weather" Right when I hear these reports: Picture Al Gore as Marlon Brando, playing Jor-el (Superman's father), and he's telling the Krypton council how their planet is doomed, by his calculations. They scoff at Jor-el's doomsday scenario until a few scenes later when their faces register shock and horror as the planet Krypton disintegrates under their feet.
June 22nd, 2006 at 4:58 pmGo Al Go!
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:00 pmThe Goddamn earth is warming, I don't care who started it, but its warming. What do we all care about more, where to place blame, or how to cope with it, and maybe offset it?
This is what really pisses me off about the Rebubblekins, they are stuck in where to place blame mode. How about, hey its there, doesn't matter who caused it, and what are we gonna do now?
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:03 pmSorry Rightwing dorktards, its already widely accepted that global warming is real, and humans have caused it. The MSM has been saying this over and over, and even as we speak. I don't care if you have valid arguments against the idea, or you hate the liberal media, this is what popular public opinion is and you can't change that. HA HA finally a liberal issue pushed by the MSM, whether true or false is irrelavant. How does the right like the taste of that medicine?
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:36 pm#16 - For Truth,
Are you being choked by the smoke from those fires in AZ?
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:41 pmWhy anyone would move back to live beneath sea level in places like New Orleans is beyond me, especially with this type of news. We really shouldn't rebuild any more then we have to IMO. Global warming produces bigger Hurricanes and rising sea levels. Democrats should step out and get a bill signed that stops giving any money to rebuild down there. It is wasted tax money as we are just building stuff that will get wrecked again.
Are Democrats for or against spending billions of tax payer dollars to rebuild a place like New Orleans that will just get submerged and destroyed by hurricanes. I would assume you guys are raging mad at the idea that we are giving away tax money even though Global warming is a FACT. Who is with me?
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:44 pmI like your attitude Goat. Ignore the problem, then ignore the consequences.
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:55 pmHey Zoo,
No the smoke isnt making it my way yet, but the anxiety has sure increased, as worse case scenario is that the fire will make it to Flagstaff. I already have an evacuation plan for home, and i am on a committee at work dealing with evacuation planning for the office. I admit I was frustrated when I wrote that post, I really beleive the climate is changing, hotter and drier. Thanks for the interest/concern, even if it is masked in sarcasm its good.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:03 pmGoat,
I would think the Republicks would be more for re-building New Orleans as it is quite the money making opportunity, and opportunity to "cleanse" the area.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:04 pmWell, if it weren't "global warming", that only leaves H.A.A.R.P.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:11 pmBut our military would never use it for that, never.
Ah, I see. So in 2005, Mother Earth suddenly decided that global warming was going to have an effect on its hurricane season. Global warming, on a steady trend since the 1970s, managed to push a secret button in 2005 where it unleashed storms not seen since.... well... earlier last century. Yeah, that makes sense I guess.
However, the thinking part of my brain is asking me why it suddenly happened in 2005 even though it was much warmer during the late 1990s...
Meh, screw the thinking part of my brain. Global warming, ra ra!
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:37 pmAw Sexion, too bad for you that natural systems are not as simple as your thinking.
Maybe you're right, storms are in no way related to the temperature of the water, and the natural cycles occur whenever you say the occur. Damn the observational data!
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:40 pmMeh, screw the thinking part of my brain. Global warming, ra ra!
Comment by Seixon — June 22, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
You really should dude it hasn't served you that well anyway.
June 22nd, 2006 at 6:42 pmKermit,
I know they're not simple, which flies in the face of this precise study. Duh. Did the warming of the Earth over the past 30 years cause a whoop-ass hurricane season in 2005? If so, why did it suddenly come in 2005? Makes no sense unless it is a complex mix of reasons which are all about the chaotic nature of the atmosphere. If the global warming = more powerful hurricanes theory was correct, then shouldn't we have had a hell of a hurricane season in 1998?
Krazny,
Now if only you had anything to back up your personal attack... Keep ignoring the debate on this issue, since you know dealing with the substance of my comments is harder than just trying to mutilate me through ad hominem.
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:06 pmComment by Seixon
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:07 pmYou know what would make real sense? You getting a life.
Seixon,
if you were't such and arrogant shit head, I would debate you. Try dropping the non-partisan act, and the arrogant prickishness of you posts, and I will respond with more then ad hominen attacks. Although in your case hominen is not the right word, since it requires that the person being attacked is human.
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:11 pmSeixon, buddy. There is no debate in other countries. Just actions to mitigate CO2, methane, CFCs emissions. Why? Just because they like the idea? Maybe you think that Global Warming means having wonderful mediterranean summers where everybody can tan peacefully. No matter how much articles you read, post or not, it is about common sense. Remeber Thomas Midgley told the world that lead in gasoline was not harmful? How did that go?
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmSexion, you are greatly simplifying things by stating that the sum of scientific research is "global warming = stronger hurricanes" when there are many factors and randomness at work. It is a gross simplification to say (as you do) that the 2004 hurricane season disproves global warming.
maybe you should leave science to the scientists. Or if you prefer you could spend half your lifetime studying the subject and then speak on equal footing to the editors of Nature.
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:35 pmIt's not like warm waters could build up over 30 years of climate change, could they? No, according to our friend here the effect would have to be immediate. Perhaps he could enlighten us: exactly how long does it take Gulf waters to build up heat from a warming climate?
And this year is predicted to be another whopper hurricane season. Maybe next year will be better? Let's hope for the sake of Gulf coast residents that Sexion is smarter than the world's scientists.
June 22nd, 2006 at 7:38 pmNo S--t!!
June 22nd, 2006 at 8:00 pmKermit,
It's not about me being smarter than the world's scientists, it is about you recognizing that the world's scientists are very split on how the warming climate affects hurricanes, much more so than they are debating anthropogenic global warming.
One of the most renowned hurricane experts in the world, Dr. William Gray, says that the hurricanes have absolutely nothing to do with global warming, but that it has everything to do with other factors, such as wind shear.
The Think Progress propaganda has you believing that there is no debate on all of these issues within the scientific community, even though there is for those of us who dare read things for ourselves.
You've got two scientists who claim that the hurricanes seen in 2005 were not part of a natural cycle, well, I've got two scientists who say the opposite. What are we to conclude?
Common sense tells me that the killer hurricane season in 2005 was not due to global warming suddenly deciding to ramp up hurricanes. If there is a relationship between global warming and hurricanes, then there should have been plenty of killer hurricanes in 1998 and other years since. There wasn't. That in itself tells me that the hurricanes work on an entirely different type of clock, if you will.
June 22nd, 2006 at 8:30 pmKrazny,
You're right. I'm not human. I'm a Bushbot programmed to slay progressive opinion and insert conservative mumbo-jumbo. Global warming: does not compute, does not compute, overload, overload!
June 22nd, 2006 at 8:39 pmThanks for the interest/concern, even if it is masked in sarcasm its good.
Comment by For Truth
This may surprise and amaze you, but I wasn't being sarcastic! I thought your post was fine, actually. I'm glad you're ok, and have a plan for evacuation. Take care.
June 22nd, 2006 at 8:54 pm"Global warming accounted for around half of the extra hurricane-fueling warmth in the waters of the tropical North Atlantic in 2005, while natural cycles were only a minor factor. "
You'd think these pseudo-scientists would at least be smart enough to not be so specific and leave a little room for error...but noooooo. Ladies and gentlemen that's a clue that the forces of evil are manipulating the data to suit themselves. "Half of the hurricane fueling warmth"??? WTF?
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:33 pmDubious and his Big Oil/Big Guns/Big Drugs Co. don't care much about the wildland fires and the hurricanes, the more the landscape is wasted, the easier it is for them to move in with the drill rigs and the concrete plants.............
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:36 pmthe more the landscape is wasted, the easier it is for them to move in with the drill rigs and the concrete plants………….
Comment by agua fiero —
...and the socialists to move in with their big fat checks and big fat politial operators to steal the money. I guess that makes it a win/win doesn't it?
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:53 pmI'm sure the debate over the cause of global warming
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:53 pmwill continue for a long time but I can't wait until the
ocean rises enough to cover Rush Limpballs house
in FL. Plus all of the waterfront homes of the crooked
politicians and big business criminals who have stolen
from the American people.
You’d think these pseudo-scientists would at least be smart enough to not be so specific and leave a little room for error
Who are the real scientists then?
These scientists tend to be pretty precise. If they say "around half of the extra hurricane-fueling warmth," they mean something very specific and aren't just pulling it out of that air.
Scientists tend to be a pretty competitive bunch. They tend to only put things up that they know can withstand the scrutiny of their peers. These people make a living off of proving and disproving each others' theses.
June 22nd, 2006 at 9:55 pmHey Zoo,,
June 22nd, 2006 at 11:07 pmThe timing of posts 16 and 17. I took it wrong.
Yes and global warming is going to be a factor in the hurricanes this summer as well! Expect bigger storms with highrer winds and more damage to coastlines!
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:06 amThe fallout from global warming can bring about behavioral changes in anyone. I have a conservative friend who has two homes - one in Northern Illinois and one in Florida, five miles away from the beach along the Gulf Coast. After experiencing last year's hurricane season, this friend is looking at not returning to Florida until late November/early December, two months later than usual, to avoid the hurricanes.
June 23rd, 2006 at 7:16 amWith most of Florida barely above sea level, I'd think about getting rid of my real estate down there.
And BTW, I have seen changes in our climate. We had snow only December. January and February were dry, our soil looked like the sun-baked desert variety - cracked and rock-hard. Flowers are blooming earlier too.
I feel sorry for the people and pets and wildlife who will be bearing the brunt of global warming along our southern coasts. El Rushbo and his ilk will head north, come flooding the blue states. And think of the billions of tourism dollars that will get a hurricane-induced soaking.
Glad I don't own Disney stock - or is Disney going to come to the Feds for a handout to surround it with flood-protection measures. After all, the air space above Disney World is a no-fly zone, but downtown Chicago isn't.
The fallout from global warming can bring about behavioral changes in anyone. I have a conservative friend who has two homes - one in Northern Illinois and one in Florida, five miles away from the beach along the Gulf Coast. After experiencing last year's hurricane season, this friend is looking at not returning to Florida until late November/early December, two months later than usual, to avoid the hurricanes.
June 23rd, 2006 at 7:16 amWith most of Florida barely above sea level, I'd think about getting rid of my real estate down there.
And BTW, I have seen changes in our climate. We had snow only December. January and February were dry, our soil looked like the sun-baked desert variety - cracked and rock-hard. Flowers are blooming earlier too.
I feel sorry for the people and pets and wildlife who will be bearing the brunt of global warming along our southern coasts. El Rushbo and his ilk will head north, come flooding the blue states. And think of the billions of tourism dollars that will get a hurricane-induced soaking.
Glad I don't own Disney stock - or is Disney going to come to the Feds for a handout to surround it with flood-protection measures. After all, the air space above Disney World is a no-fly zone, but downtown Chicago isn't.
in 1975 newsweek mag. supported by a whole gaggle of "scientists" (probably some of these same global warming scientists) reported we were about to enter another ice age. Good thing we didn't start doing back-flips over that one.
June 23rd, 2006 at 9:40 amFlash-- that's such an old one.
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/they-predicted-cooling-in-1970s.html
This is like playing Whackamole. Flash, before you post anything else in the future, look at illconsidered.blogspot.com. Chances are it's already answered any objection you have.
June 23rd, 2006 at 9:59 ami'm sure I cold get that alien consesus right here on this site.
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:04 ami’m sure I cold get that alien consesus right here on this site.
Well do some research into the science. And then tell us what you think. If it weren't for scientists, you wouldn't be typing on this computer right now.
You could start by listening to this interview with NASA climatologist James Hansen:
http://www.onpointradio.org/shows/2006/06/20060621_b_main.asp
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:11 amAll kidding aside there are many acredited environmental scientist who are, and have been publishing data that opposse data that is so reverred on this site. Claiming that there are not any, or that the ones that do are some kind of clowns does not fool anybody. Accepting that there are different views is healthy. Not to mention that there are tons of regulations and laws on the books already that support a clean environment.
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:23 amAll kidding aside there are many acredited environmental scientist who are, and have been publishing data that opposse data that is so reverred on this site.
Here's a good story about the present cohort of scientists denying climate change:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301305_pf.html
Blogger John Quiggin has a good summary of this story:
http://crookedtimber.org/2006/06/01/yet-more-hackery/
...Not to mention that there are tons of regulations and laws on the books already that support a clean environment.
None that support cutting CO2 emissions. In fact the federal government is actively trying to stop the states from cutting CO2 emissions. (I thought Republicans were for states rights?)
June 23rd, 2006 at 10:51 amSeixon,
I used to live in the Buffalo, NY area on Lake Erie. We'd typically start to get freezing temperatures in October, and by November there were only isolated days above freezing. However, the lake didn't freeze until January.
Tell me, why didn't it freeze in November?
In April, there was usually and end to temperatures below freezing, but the lake didn't thaw until June.
Tell me: Why didn't it thaw in April?
Now I know in the past it's been hard for you to draw any logical conclusions, but give it a try and tell me if you think the oceans would respond to temperature changes more quickly or more slowly than a lake?
By the way, from what I've heard, Buffalo winters are far warmer than they were when I lived there.
June 23rd, 2006 at 12:43 pmI was educated in a country where, fifty years ago, we were taught that humans were having an adverse effect on the environment. At that time, scientific research had proved beyond a doubt that global warming was an inevitable result of so-called civilized lifestyles and overpopulation. We were taught that this planet can only support two billion people -- today we are at 6.5 billion and increasing rapidly. Why is it that this information has taken so long to penetrate the consciousness of the United States? And after reading some of the misspelled, ungramatical dissertations by flatearthers, apparently many of our citizens are still stuck in a mental Stone Age. The entire population of this country needs to be educated and to understand that they can be part of the solution, and that their greedy, self-centered behavior in insisting on driving everywhere in gas-guzzling vehicles, eating huge quantities of meat, and participating in a consumer society gone beserk is one of the main causes of global warming.
June 23rd, 2006 at 4:10 pmAs a graduate student in physical chemistry back in the early eighties scientists en masse began to study in detail the mechanism's destroying the ozone layer and the affect of greenhouse gas emissions. At that time one could realistically question the magnitude of the effect humans were having on the environment. At this point scientists have learned many of the reaction mechanisms and atmospheric scientist’s models have improved greatly. Twenty years later scientists have reached a formal consensus in rigorous peer reviewed scientific studies.
Technology is available to meet this issue head on but it will not happen without political support. To enable major social and technological change American citizens must insist on investing in the future.
June 23rd, 2006 at 6:07 pmLily,
Seixon,
I used to live in the Buffalo, NY area on Lake Erie. We’d typically start to get freezing temperatures in October, and by November there were only isolated days above freezing. However, the lake didn’t freeze until January.
Tell me, why didn’t it freeze in November?
According to the weather graph here, it DID freeze in Buffalo, NY this past winter. In November.
I'm not sure what you are trying to get at.
In April, there was usually and end to temperatures below freezing, but the lake didn’t thaw until June.
Tell me: Why didn’t it thaw in April?
I don't know, but the graph for the past years seems to indicate that it might have. Yet if it didn't thaw in April but in June, wouldn't that indicate that the season shifted a few months instead of generally getting warmer?
Now I know in the past it’s been hard for you to draw any logical conclusions, but give it a try and tell me if you think the oceans would respond to temperature changes more quickly or more slowly than a lake?
Well that's certainly easy, but you seem to have missed the fact that the lake stayed colder until June, according to you, instead of just to April, and started freezing later than usual. In other words, according to you, the temperatures haven't gotten any warmer, it's just that the season was changed a few months forward.
By the way, from what I’ve heard, Buffalo winters are far warmer than they were when I lived there.
So what? That doesn't prove anything. Just looking at the almanac for yesterday, the record high was 92 F, set in 1949, with yesterday's temp at 78 F. Does that prove anything? No, and neither do your observations that it is supposedly warmer now than what it used to be when you lived there.
The climate changes naturally over time, back and forth. That's all you are seeming to indicate here. The temperatures in Buffalo, NY are not unprecedented by any means.
In fact, check out this site and check on Buffalo, NY yourself. Here you can see that as of 2003, the winter temperature is no warmer than it was in the early 1930s, and in fact colder than it was in 1881.
As for yearly, Buffalo, NY is no warmer today than it was in 1921, the late 1940s, and even the late 1890s.
Check it out for yourself. If you really believe global warming has effected Buffalo, NY, you are seriously mistaken.
June 24th, 2006 at 7:50 amOk, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this. Maybe you just misunderstood. I am not trying to prove Buffalo has shown effects of GW. In fact, just forget about it being Buffalo. What I a,m saying is that it took a lake 2 months to freeze, and then 2 months to thaw. Why?
June 24th, 2006 at 12:12 pmLily,
Why are you asking this question?
Is it abnormal for the lake to take 2 months to freeze and thaw?
If it doesn't have anything to do with global warming, why in the hell are you even asking the question?
The lake would thaw when it's warm enough, and freeze when it's cold enough. That's just about the best I can give you, and I fail to see the relevance in this discussion.
I'm struggling to understand just what in the hell you are going for here.
June 24th, 2006 at 2:15 pmCommon sense tells me that the killer hurricane season in 2005 was not due to global warming suddenly deciding to ramp up hurricanes.
Comment by Seixon
It’s not like warm waters could build up over 30 years of climate change, could they? No, according to our friend here the effect would have to be immediate. Perhaps he could enlighten us: exactly how long does it take Gulf waters to build up heat from a warming climate?
Comment by Kermit the Freedom Frog
Seixon, as you can see, Kermit already explained it. I was trying to point out an example of how changing temperatures do not have an immediate effect on large bodies of water.
I'm sure you don't care, but now you're on my list of posts I won't read. I defended you once, because it seemed like you were actually interested in debate. Now I agree with the others. Your posts make very little sense anymore, and you can't respond reasonably to anyone else.
June 25th, 2006 at 8:59 amGlbal Warming is really happening and for those of you out there who don't think so, WAKE UP!!! If we don't act quickly this will be the end of the earth. For me personally I have at least another 65 years on this planet and I don't want to be living in a toxic envirnment. The main contributers of these toxic emmisions are the United States, followed by Australia and in third Canada. I congratulate NCAR for posting the results of their study, because people need to be aware of what is happening. I've seen An Inconvenient Truth and Al Gore is brilliant!!! Stephan Harper you and your politicians can deny it all you like but for the the rest of us, we are going to continue to make the changes and expose you for what you really are!!! You are corrupt, and only care if your not the one getting screwed over! Enough is enough, at my high school raised money for a non profit organization that was working to stop global warming! Because that is how we stick it to the man!!! The future is ours and we won't let it be destroyed by these fools! To hell with STEPHAN HARPER, AND BUSH!!!!
June 27th, 2006 at 5:18 pm[...] But ultimately, it doesn’t matter much whether Landsea is right or not. And there are other studies that establish the link between global warming and hurricane strength that do not rely on the suspect data. Bill Chameides, Chief Scientist at Environmental Defense, elaborates on this point, using a study that relies on ocean temperature data: [Landsea’s study] from a public policy perspective has been made largely moot by the work of Trenberth and Shea, published in June 2006 in Geophysical Research Letters. They showed that 50 percent of the extremely warm temperatures of the North Atlantic Ocean in the summer of 2005 that spawned the record-breaking 2005 hurricane season was caused by global warming. [Release, 7/31/06] [...]
August 1st, 2006 at 3:05 pmthis website was bad because it confuzed me and there was to much writting, not enough pictures!!! I'm writting this complaint to you so you can improve this site in the future. I would greatly appreciate an apology. Yours sincerly Lewis!
September 14th, 2006 at 2:08 amGLOBAL WARMING IS GAY SO THE EARTH WARMS DO WE GET WORLD PEACE?
November 30th, 2006 at 3:13 pmDont you see what is happening , the Planet will start fighting back and guess what will happen then , Everyone will die.
December 22nd, 2006 at 9:45 amGarden Ponds
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 18th, 2008 at 11:42 amhand cycles
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
March 24th, 2008 at 5:08 amNatural And Best Way To Cleanse Body
It is a quite interesting post but quite difficult to understand for me -
April 1st, 2008 at 12:14 amMarilynn
Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.
April 8th, 2008 at 2:32 pmAll about Digimon Adventure Online Game. Digimon Adventure Fans Blog....
...Digimon is a small virtual pet. You can download and play an online RPG in the Digimon universe. It looks and feels like 2D graphic RPG adventure. You can train and level up your Digimon, make hundreds of quests, and travel through a huge universe a...
March 13th, 2009 at 4:51 pmShag Hairstyles and Haircuts...
shag hairstyle basically gotits name from the word "shaggy" since ...once the hair is cutand layered it gives off a shaggy look. The shag hairstyle has always been apopular hairstyle, and there are plenty ofshag hairstyles to choose from...
April 14th, 2009 at 7:22 am