Groups Attacking Global Warming Science Attack ThinkProgress
Groups Attacking Global Warming Science Attack ThinkProgress
Our post yesterday criticizing Bonner Cohen for spreading misinformation on global warming on C-SPAN has rubbed some folks the wrong way.
First, the National Center for Public Policy Research accuses us of “libel” for suggesting that Cohen receives funding from the fossil fuel industry.
That’s interesting. Cohen was asked yesterday who funds the National Center for Public Policy Research and, after some prodding, he acknowledged that it receives funding from the fossil fuel industry. Watch it:
NCPPR and Cohen emphasize that most of their money comes from “individual donations.” They don’t mention how many of those individuals are also connected to the fossil fuel industry.
Another group that employs Cohen, the Capital Research Center, is mad that we didn’t attack them instead:
So, Think Progress, if you’re reading this, please direct your venom regarding Cohen’s masterful, exhaustively documented expose of the environmentalist movement to the Capital Research Center in the future. We have more than enough intellectual firepower to cut through your irrational emotion-driven temper tantrums.
We accept your offer. Please use your “intellectual firepower” to substantiate Bonner’s claim that the “vast majority” of climatologists are “agnostic” on the existence of global warming. According to Bonner, that would mean they are undecided on the question of whether “there is a causal relationship between emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate.”
Hundreds of climatologists have agreed that global warming is real through the IPCC process — so it better be a pretty long list. We’re waiting.
Transcript:
HOST: How is it funded?
BONNER: How is it funded? Mostly through individual donations. Vast majority. Over something like 95% come from individual donations. The rest comes from foundations and some minor corporate.
HOST: Energy industry at all?
BONNER: Yes, some.
HOST: Which forms?
BONNER: It would be, it would be — they they they come from from the fossil fuel industry.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Next they’ll be claiming that the Earth is flat, the vast majority of scientists agree…
August 10th, 2006 at 2:42 pmI bet Cohen gets all the chicks.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:42 pmHOST: Which forms?
BONNER: It would be, It would be — they they they come from from the fossil fuel industry.
See how hard it is to tell the truth for these guys. He can’t speak ’cause he knows he should be lieing about this but he can’t. But he wants to so bad. It’s like a little kid stuttering “I,I,I didn’t do, didn’t do it.”
August 10th, 2006 at 2:43 pmDon’t you think we have spent enough time on Global Warming? While I am always ready to display my brilliance, isn’t it time we attacked arsenic in drinking water or atmospheric lead? /sarcasm off
August 10th, 2006 at 2:43 pmI want to prepare everyone here: you can expect a post from The Truth about Think Progress blaming Global Warming on George Soros.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:44 pmI still think this cohen guy looks like beeker from the muppet show
August 10th, 2006 at 2:46 pm#5 - I think he’s a cut & paste troll, so we may be spared that clap-trap.
PS - Please note my apology for the mis-reference to your post. I was pointing to “Lies about TP”.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:48 pmDon’t you think we have spent enough time on Global Warming? While I am always ready to display my brilliance, isn’t it time we attacked arsenic in drinking water or atmospheric lead? /sarcasm off
Comment by Skeptic — August 10, 2006 @ 2:43 pm
We should just make the change. Do it.
Start with energy saving bulbs, move on to insulation and then heat exchange systems or solid fuels for heating. Thats a 25 - 50% cut in household energy usage right there.
Just DO IT.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:50 pmThey think that talking tuff (“intellectual firepowerâ€) as rightwingers always do… will keep them from looking stupid… TP has already been through this over and over… If the science community really was against TP on this wouldnt SOMEONE from the right have already listed the large body of science that disagrees with TP?
Clue: Using the world “firepower” may make you look cool in a red neck bar fight… but linking it with the word “intellectual” does not make you smart…
August 10th, 2006 at 2:50 pmKeep up the good work Think Progress! I for one appreciate all the attention you give to this issue. Despite the fact that the scientific community has come to agreement on Global Warming (that its real and poses a huge threat), the artificial debate pushed by the fossil fuel industry is as strong as ever.
Until we make serious changes to avert this catastrophe, as much attention should be placed on this issue as possible.
Oh, and you guys must have struck a nerve in order for these guys to address Think Progress specifically. Keep putting the spotlight on their lies!!!
August 10th, 2006 at 2:51 pmJudd, you’re entering into a playground fight with a half witted retard.
Good for you!
August 10th, 2006 at 2:52 pmThen make sure your next car is Daihatsu Cuore, 50 MPG and not a battery in sight.
http://www.daihatsu.com/catalogue/cuore/index.html …
If every american did the above, you’d cut energy consumption by 10 to 15%. It’s not hard it’s EASY.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:53 pmGet ready for the ’shock and awe’ of their intellectual firepower.
Who the F are these clowns anyways?
August 10th, 2006 at 2:54 pmPlayground fight? These people are serious and their misinformation campaigns cause serious harm in the fight to educate people on this pressing issue. TP is calling them out, as they should.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:54 pmSpeaking of the Republican war on science…
President Bush’s cynical efforts to block over the counter sales of the emergency contraceptive Plan B have taken on almost comic proportions in recent days. But kowtowing to the radical right on Plan B has come at a steep price for Mike Leavitt, George Allen and other Republicans in the administration and Congress.
For the details, see:
August 10th, 2006 at 2:54 pm“Plan B’s Tangled Web.”
They guy said 95% of his funding was from personal donations and the rest from fossil fuel companies. I think that 95% makeup is far more important. Am I missing something here?
August 10th, 2006 at 2:56 pmThey’re backed into a corner with no way out except to admit they’re wrong, so they’ll fight to the death, like cowards, cornered like rats. I love it.
Keep hammering them TP, they’ve got nothing scientific or even realistic to base their argument.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:56 pmWhat the hell does it mean for a scientist to be “agnostic” on something? Scientific method requires that a theory must be revised or discarded if evidence appears that disproves it. Since it is always possible that new evidence can appear — even if it requires that all quantum spins on the planet line up for a microsecond — anyone following scientific theory on any subject is “agnostic.”
In a rational world people who put forth “arguments” like this would never be listened to. But unfortunately we live in an era where a Jonah Goldberg is a deemed a serious thinker.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:57 pmI saw this guy on TV and thought, “what a loon”.
How can he make reference to “most scientists” without being able to name one scientist? Obviously he doesn’t understand that scientists have rigorous testing procedures that would permit him to name names.
On a side note, this guy is just plain creepy.
August 10th, 2006 at 2:57 pmBoo hoo. They got their feelings hurt because they were outted. Too bad. Get over it. Liars will not be tolerated, especially those who lie for profit as the expense of every living thing on this planet. Shame on them.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:01 pmDisplay of Brilliance:
I can read and I found by careful searching yesterday a site that explodes most wrong ideas about global warming, including the Urban Heat Island affect. So please look at this site.
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 02/ how-to-talk-to-global-warming-sceptic.html
August 10th, 2006 at 3:02 pmBrian Coughlin;
August 10th, 2006 at 3:04 pmI am now using compact florescent bulbs through most of my apartment. I started doing this about 14 years ago when bulbs were $29.00 apiece. I could only afford to buy one bulb every other paycheck. I also wash dishes by hand instead of using the dishwasher. This doesn’t save much energy but every little bit helps.
WTF is “….climatologists are “agnostic†on the existence of global warming….†Supposed to mean? This is not something that you either believe in or you don’t based on what you feel comfortable with. This is not a question of faith.
This kind of pro-corporations false framing, repeated thousands of times by the complicit corporate media machinery, creates an illusion of millions of scientists on both sides of the issue. Nothing could be further from the truth. Almost all experts agree that enough evidence exists. That has to be good enough.
Can we afford the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:06 pmIf the facts are not on your side, pound on the table and scream “intellectual firepower” at your opponents.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:06 pmJudd,
You still haven’t addressed my question, why isn’t George Soros mentioned anywhere on the Think Progress website? Are you that ashamed of where your money comes from or doesn’t he want people to know who’s actually paying the bills. I seriously doubt you guys can actually raise enough money on your own to pay your staff etc. I think that if you expect the Bush administration to be open and honest about what they do, shouldn’t you start at home first?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:08 pmHey TP thanks for the hard work,I think you managed to blindside Mr magoo!
August 10th, 2006 at 3:11 pmYou’ll get your “evidence” when Horowitz provides his “exhastive rebuttal” to Media Matters. (ie NEVER)
August 10th, 2006 at 3:13 pmI think that if you expect the Bush administration to be open and honest about what they do, shouldn’t you start at home first?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:14 pm- - Well, George Soros may be old, but he’s not a fossil fuel.
For giggles about this moron…
August 10th, 2006 at 3:15 pmDr. Bunsen Honeydew + Beaker = Bonner Cohen
http://athousandwordsworth.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 08/ bonner-cohen-bullshit-conner.html
The use of the term agnostic means that a vast majority of climatologists think that there is something out there, they just don’t know what it is.
If he said:
Then that would mean that a vast majority of climatologists don’t think there is anything out there.
If they are going to frame everything as being releigious, then make them stick to the proper definitions.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:15 pmtruthabout thinkprogress - dude, you just don’t care that you’re standing in public naked, and we see you. We’ve seen you. Many of us berated you under your real name, remember your old screen name? I’ve been to your website. It was built by kindergardeners.
Why don’t you try and grab a life over at redstate where they’ll call you a hero every day….
August 10th, 2006 at 3:15 pmWell, I will say one thing: if there is no causal relationship between greenhouse gasses, then the planet Venus must be perfectly habitable by human beings.
That’s good news for when the increase in Earth’s greenhouse gasses don’t cause the global warming that isn’t happening. We can all not move to Venus.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:16 pmThe Truth about Think Progress,
Nobody cares if George Soros does or does not fund Think Progress. We just don’t care.
Judd,
Don’t waste one second addressing this moron, because nobody else here cares.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:17 pmThe national public policy research center just wants to disassociate themselves from Bonner, the stumbling fool, and the capitol research center was willing to take over and run as cover.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:22 pmImagine either of these groups having “research” attached to their names.
Fossil fueled hacks like Cohen will never stop spewing their lies.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:23 pmComment by The Truth about Think Progress
What is your hang up with George Soros? I heard him on the radio the other day and seemed a logical and rational person … and why would TP make any mention of him? Is there some reason you think anyone would have a reason to hide anything about George Soros? TP also may also have a woman named lolita that takes out their trash… do they need to stop hiding her to?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:23 pmHere’s the wiki article
http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
August 10th, 2006 at 3:24 pm#33 good point
Mars, Earth and Venus all show varying degrees of how greenhouse gases can trap heat. On mars the atmosphere is so thin that temperatures remain freezing cold even during the day. Venus has 400 times the atmospheric pressure of Earth and also has a hell of a lot more greenhouse gases - the result is a surface temperature (literally) hotter than an oven. Then we have Earth, which up to now has been in a nice balance between the two extremes for billions of years.
Mars is quite a bit further away from the sun than the Earth which does account for some of the difference in climate, but cannot account for most of it. If Mars had an atmosphere as thick as the Earth’s it would be MUCH closer to Earth’s temperatures.
These facts have been substantiated by planetary scientists for decades without any significant challenge to the science - it is in essance regarded as fact. Why now does the idea behind greenhouse gases come under attack? Because suddenly it might mean changing our way of life and for the Oil industry it means the possibility of going out of business.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:26 pmI could only afford to buy one bulb every other paycheck. I also wash dishes by hand instead of using the dishwasher. This doesn’t save much energy but every little bit helps.
Comment by Skeptic — August 10, 2006 @ 3:04 pm
Thats the spirit :-)
August 10th, 2006 at 3:26 pmI think the truth about think progress poster, is the same one who was triping over himself to bash Cindy Sheehan the other day. It didn’t seem to matter much, that the topic had nothing to do with Sheehan. I suspect, it is mostly an impulse to attack a target, any target, because they are afraid.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:26 pmThey guy said 95% of his funding was from personal donations and the rest from fossil fuel companies. I think that 95% makeup is far more important. Am I missing something here?
Comment by Badmoodman — August 10, 2006 @ 2:56 pm
If they lie about climate science so blatantly how can we expect them to tell the truth in terms of the source of funding? One lie puts everything they say into question IMHO
Anyway it wouldn’t matter if it was all from private donations, its still BS and still part of a misinformation campaign.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:31 pmMr. Magoo on Viagra?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:31 pmcongrats! you have these idiots scared
August 10th, 2006 at 3:33 pmThe right wing needs enemies to survive. They can’t sell their agenda on its merits, so they waste their time attacking people. If you listen to right wing radio, this is the basis for their existence. George Soros is simply another victim.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:36 pmOooooooh. we’re sooooo scared!!!!!!!!! What will they do to us?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:38 pmRepublican attacks against anyone proposing responsive action with regard to global warming fit neatly into their entrenched mindset which states ‘do nothing until the situation reaches crisis proportions.’ Republicans have zero understanding of an ounce for prevention versus a pound for cure. Take Katrina. The billions needed to strengthen the levees, detailed in lengthy reports prior to the catastrophe, have been massively dwarfed by the billions now needed to do what was first recommended. Lives were lost, lives were ruined, a city remains in a shambles and the levees must still be strengthened. So not only do we have to spend the billions initially recommended, we must spend many billions more to clean up a disaster that should never have happened, especially since it was so thoroughly predicted.
Republicans are greedy, short-sighted bastards. Every damn thing comes down to money. The blindness and incivility inherent to Republican selfishness is that the funds we do not spend to prevent a crisis are ALWAYS dwarfed by the clean-up when the disaster inevitably hits. You can see this at work everywhere.
- Cut veteran’s benefits - create homeless vets and vets with untreated post-traumatic stress who will stress the system far more than they would if they had been treated fully and deservedly from the get-go.
- Make it impossible for the poor to receive health care - the poor do nothing about their health until it becomes a crisis, thereby inflaming their illness, which further disables their ability to rise up the economic ladder and again costs many more tax dollars when their only option is the emergency ward.
The only truly patriotic stance for any American is to identify a problem and fund the preventative measures needed to keep it from becoming a costly and life-threatening crisis.
Naturally the neocons will say that’s what Bush is doing in the GWOT. Pure B.S. If we had stayed the course in Afghanistan, kept our mitts off Iraq, nailed Bin Laden and massively pushed to develop alternate clean energy the day after 9/11 thousands of Americans would still be alive, our international reputation would not be in tatters, we would not be the recruiting tool that encourages thousands more into becoming terrorists, our treasury would still have billions of dollars to spend on strengthening port and border security and we would OWN the next generation of energy technology that would massively help to lessen our trade imbalance even as it drained oil-based terrorism finances.
Global warming denial is just another example of Republican greed, which can be summed as sacrifice our future to buffet present-day corporate profits.
To my mind, there is no better definition of treason, only in this case it isn’t just against fellow Americans, it’s treason against every living thing on the entire planet. As species go extinct, as more links in the chain of biodiversity are lost because of intentional inaction on the part of corporate toady Republicans, the full effect of global warming will play out as the earth is robbed of evolutionary symbiosis, the delicate balance that has kept virtually all ecosystems maintained for millions of years.
August 10th, 2006 at 3:38 pmComment by Martin — August 10, 2006 @ 3:38 pm
Great post Martin:-)
August 10th, 2006 at 3:47 pmWaxman to FEMA: Why are Katrina Evacuee Trailers Full of Formaldehyde Gas?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:54 pmTP: Here are facts to back up our assertions.
CRC: That’s an emotional-driven temper tantrum. Now I will unleash my intellectual firepower. Pow! Pow!
August 10th, 2006 at 3:56 pmGood work Judd. Where do these rent-a-pundits come from ?
August 10th, 2006 at 3:58 pmJudd, today it’s “hundreds of climatologists”, yesterday it was “thousands of scientists”. Are you backing off or making a distinction?
August 10th, 2006 at 4:00 pm#26: Did you read #5 predicting you would spout trollspeak about George Soros, and decide to prove him right? Or is #5 just proving his superior intellectual firepower?
August 10th, 2006 at 4:01 pmThey guy said 95% of his funding was from personal donations and the rest from fossil fuel companies. I think that 95% makeup is far more important. Am I missing something here?
Actually, he said:
“something like 95% of it’s donations come from individual donations.”
It would surprise me if 95% of their contributors were individuals, but you’ll notice he didn’t say that 95% of the money comes from individual donors. But you’re a dishonest troll, so I wouldn’t expect you to notice the deception.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:06 pmIt would surprise me
Make that “It wouldn’t surprise me…”
August 10th, 2006 at 4:07 pmWhat kind of people personally fund a center for public policy research? Very rich people, the kind that pay to promote their political agendas. LIke people who run fossil fuel companies.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:18 pmHey Brian, good to see you on here, pal.
I actually took the dramatic step of getting rid of my car completely. I live in an urban setting where nearly everything I need is within a 2-mile walking or biking distance. For the last two years I haven’t spent a penny on gasoline, car maintenance or car insurance. If I need to go farther in the city, mass transit works well for me. If I need to take a road trip, I can rent a high-mileage car only for that period. Online shopping, aligned with a degree of patience, further eradicates my need to get in a car and get what I need. The side benefits of having no personal car, apart from saving thousands of dollars and not contributing to global warming, are both an appreciation of my surrounding neighborhoods and better health from all that walking.
I’ve also pared my possessions down to the essentials. There is so much truth to the adage that the more stuff you own the more it owns you. We are constantly told to buy, buy, buy. Consumerism is an addictive disease. In reality, I have found so much more peace of mind in owning as little as possible. You really do help when you refrain from buying what you don’t really need. It’s equally important to hold onto your necessary possessions as long as possible. Do you really need a new computer that’s marginally faster? Do you really need a bigger TV? Do you really need that boat or that motorhome you might use twice a year? Do you really need a house that stresses the limit of your ability to maintain? Downsizing is terrible for labor but great in your personal life. Keeping up with the Joneses is just plain stupid if you are truly committed to making a difference. The money you save by holding off on new purchases is better spent enhancing your actual life, i.e. education, health care, travel.
My current step follows my purchase of an historic apartment complex that I am rebuilding with fully insulated floors, walls and ceiling, all new wiring and plumbing to maximize efficiency and solar roof panels to notably diminish all power needs. It’s a sunny region here, great for solar, but when it rains it pours and I intend to direct that runoff into cisterns for sprinkler usage. Now if only I had a running stream to direct some flow through a micro-hydro turbine; I could get this place entirely off the grid.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:24 pmAccording to Desmogblog, Cohen used to shill for big tobacco as well:
http://www.desmogblog.com/ tobacco-hack-turned-climate-change-flak
August 10th, 2006 at 4:39 pmStand in there Judd!
August 10th, 2006 at 4:46 pmDon’t let them get away with their lies.
#58: Instead of pasting entire articles into the text of your posts, please use a link. We can decide for ourselves if we want to read your propaganda.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:46 pmWe have more than enough intellectual firepower to cut through your irrational emotion-driven temper tantrums.
Our side actually started using the ‘emotional’ explanation in regard to the Republican response, because it is scientifically documented that they think with the emotional and not logical centers of their brains. It must’ve stung if they are now mimicking us - even if they don’t understand that it is actually their issue. And, as they say - immitation is the sincerest form of flattery… :)
August 10th, 2006 at 4:50 pm#58
August 10th, 2006 at 4:52 pmDo you have references? The whole article is a little big to digest at once but I noticed some of the references were to recent events like “Inconvenient Truth” and others to articles presented in the 90s’
You still haven’t addressed my question, why isn’t George Soros mentioned anywhere on the Think Progress website?
Comment by The Truth about Think Progress — August 10, 2006 @ 3:08 pm
Do you have a billboard in your front yard for the company you work for?
It’s common knowledge that Soros is the money behind TP. Who needs to brag? Apparently not Mr. Soros.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:56 pmHey Bruce,
Your disingenuous tome, far too damn long and better served by a link, is noted. You are, of course, totally wrong. What economic or societal stability might there be in a world assaulted by incessantly chaotic and destructive weather systems that devastate crop yields, butcher coastal cities and further inflame energy wars? Again, you spout the same ‘do-nothing’ now because it will hurt our contemporary pocketbooks b.s. Do you have any interest in leaving future generations with a future worth living? Apparently you think the fiscal cost is too high. That same stance is what led to Katrina wiping out most of New Orleans. We could have prevented the disaster. Bush said no to spending the money. He instead gave tax cuts to the wealthy. Now we have to pay a tenfold amount to fix the disaster, barely ackinowledging that long-term, hidden costs incurred by all those lives tossed into chaos.
Sure, there will be economic sacrifices. Deal with that fact now or gulp at the immense cost later.; Fairly, the burden should be placed on the industries so acutely responsible for the problem. It’s an ounce of prevention time. You propose the insane idea that we should wait until global warming is a universally undeniable catastrophe to take action? How much will it cost then? Less than it will cost now? Get real. Waiting until things are so far gone that famine and social turmoil are rampant worldwide does nothing for long-term economic and societal stability. Essentially, you suggest that we do not duck a knife thrown our way because we don’t yet know how deep it will cut. Speciously foolhardy of you and revolting in its disregard for life on planet earth.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:57 pmBruce;
August 10th, 2006 at 4:57 pmJust looked at #58 again. Thats two different articles you are copying not one. Are you trying to be confusing?
Meanwhile, Eskimos are having to buy air-conditioners.
By all means, let’s pay more people to say “there’s no problem.” We might even fool a few of the really stupid ones.
August 10th, 2006 at 4:59 pm.
Can someone please delete that scroll trolls screed?
Not only is he completely wrong but also extremely annoying.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:03 pmChrist! It’s ALWAYS about money to these neocons oafs! You think God or Jesus will pull a Deus Ex Machina in the nick of time and save us from our folly? Is that your damn answer? “Gee, God wouldn’t let that happen.” Right. If God wouldn’t let us destroy ourselves then God would have stopped every instance of war since man walked on two legs. God is not the decider of our fate. We are. In spite of you dolts we are trying to save your hides by slowing and reversing an environmental disaster that promises to make daily life on earth a living hell. And yes, if our fight to stop global warming allows you to keep your stock portfolio intact and growing we will not mind. What we do mind is you blinder-wearing rat-bastards getting in our way, slowing down action and letting the problem grow even more severe. You’re a pack of fools of the first order, utterly devoid of common sense, logical morality and even basic decency toward your fellow humans on the planet of your birth. And stop wondering why we hate you. Like we’d hate any murderer, especially the kind that gloats over his crime, we hate the contempt you display toward the only damn place we absolutely know where life exists in the entire universe.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:09 pmIf your god won’t save abused children, then why in the hell would he save you? You have it better than molested and neglected kids after all…
August 10th, 2006 at 5:15 pmNow that’s pissin your pants… when the liars attack TP, then they are pissin scared of the truth.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:19 pmOffense must be the strategy. To counteract this sort of thing, a campaign for the Dems should revolve around the concept of Bumbling.
Soundbiting: “We as a nation can no longer abide the President’s bumbling on controlling the deficit.â€
“The Bush administration’s bumbling must stop right here, right now!â€
“The Republicans have obviously decided that Americans prefer their bumbling to Democrat’s competency. I think they are wrong.â€
Phony rhetorical questions: “Is Bush and the Republican’s bumbling making the world more dangerous?â€
“How dangerous is Mr. Bush’s bumbling in Iraq?â€
“Can the Bush Adminstritation’s bumbling in world diplomacy be overcome by the next president?â€
Straw men: “Some say the Bush Administration is bumbling on the economy . . . what’s your response?â€
“Some would say the GOP is a bunch of bumblers . . . How much truth is there in that?â€
Screen-crawlers: “Has the Bush Admin’s Bumbling Hurt the New Orleans’ Recovery?â€
It’s time to start our own Meme.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:21 pmyou’re doing a great job Think Progress, please keep up the good work
August 10th, 2006 at 5:22 pmHOST: How is it funded?
BONNER: How is it funded? Mostly through individual donations. Vast majority. Over something like 95% come from individual donations. The rest comes from foundations and some minor corporate.
HOST: Energy industry at all?
BONNER: Yes, some.
HOST: Which forms?
BONNER: It would be, it would be — they they they come from from the fossil fuel industry.
Fossil fuel industry? What that paid monkey (Bonner Cohen) didn’t want to mouth is *OIL INDUSTRY*
August 10th, 2006 at 5:30 pmWhat’s funny is that trolls like Brucie seem to forget that unless they have infinitely self-sustaining escape pods that can function in outer space, then their willfully ignorant asses are stuck here on earth and subject to the same atmospheric forces everyone else is
Oh sure, when the global warming realy kicks in, it will be far too late to take any meaningful action to reverse the effects, but at the very least, if there was ever a perfect time to play the “I Told You So” card…..
August 10th, 2006 at 5:45 pmMartin, 68
I hear and feel your pain. I believe I might help you in explaining why Americans are buying themselves into an early grave and also why they’re voting against their own best interest. Here’s an email I sent to a progressive talk radio host, Bernie Ward, over a year ago. I hope this will be some help to you.
Mr. Ward,
My name is Armando Gomez, an ardent listener to your nightly radio spot. Right now I’m writing this email as I’m listening to your program, and I may have the answer to the confusing question why Americans are voting against their own self interests. And the basic answer is that their (White America) sense of history and self-worth have come into question. To them this is unacceptable—at any and all cost, which is happening at this moment.
Realistically, all this began to manifest when Ronald Reagan was elected as president. But in all honestly, it really started with the Vietnam War and its shocking and unacceptable conclusion: we lost. And it wasn’t just the war we lost—we also lost our president, Richard Nixon. This sent a shock wave, border to border and coast to coast of White America. Both the war and President Nixon were proven to be a phony and a lie. This forced White America to question the very core of their moral foundation and their sense of purpose—their purpose of self-righteous, which they believe is their destiny, and guided by the Light from above. All this scattered when Nixon tanked. I remembered. I’m 56. But within a couple of years after Nixon’s fall, a new and up coming Religious Right movement went to work, scoring one victory after another. And I believe all this was spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation. The Foundation’s tactics: Accuse the Liberals of anti-family, anti-God, anti-America, anti-mother, and in short: anti-Liberal all around. And make the word “Liberal†an expletive (remember the “L†word?). And all this was pushed and funded by the multi-right wing millionaires and the corporate media.
And I believe you know who and what they are. What this movement accomplishes was to exonerate White America of their failures, and blame “The Fall†on the dirty and back-stabbing Liberals. And White America went for it, hook, line, and sinker. They had no choice: To accept otherwise, they would have to question their entire “white†history. Without this history—or myth—they will have to accept a more realistic one—according to Ward Churchill. White Americans find that totally unacceptable. And for these White Americans they are ready to accept any politician, any judge, and any president that’ll tell them what they want to hear, especially when Jesus Christ is now considered as part of their White American history. That’s why they are more than ready to believe such phonies as Reagan, the first Bush, and this latest disgrace, Bush, Jr.
But with the present do-nothing White American voters, it gets worse: these Americans are willing to sacrifice their children’s and their grandchildren’s future, just so they can bail out in the rapture in time or die in their sleep. For those Mr. Moneybags—to die rich in there beds are their dreams. Mr. Ward, to me these are the worst and the most rotten cowards any nation who is misfortunately are straddled with; stinking vermin who aren’t fit to be scurrying about. The disposition of Social Security, the bankruptcy bill, Medicare, pensions, job out-sourcing and others are examples of how far these Americans have sunk. The talk I hear is that these Americans are the stupidest piles of rocks on the planet. Wrong: It’s worse. Sept. 11 and the Iraq War only provide further excuses for these Americans to stab your fellow neighbors in the back—including our own veterans.
So, for Americans to swallow this new Direction of Bush, provided by the Republicans bashing machine, they have gone soft between the ears and soft between the legs. In short, STARK, RAVING PSYHOCITICS, not stupid. That’s why they can’t or won’t be reached. And that is the answer why these Americans are voting against their own self-interest, and why they’re steering our country into the toilet.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:52 pm#74, when real global warming does kick in (which is where we inevitably seem to be headed), I will gladly line those up against the wall who kept saying it isn’t real.
That’s the least they deserve.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:53 pmIf global warming is allowed to reach its full bore strength we can expect, without reservation, that business-as-usual on planet earth will utterly end. At that time, lifestyles, even those not in immediate peril, will have to massively adjust. Imagine Florida 20% under water. What will be the economic loss from that alone? How will other communities adjust to a swell of refugees? How will that huge stress on social services degrade our economy? How far will it lower our standard of living?
Global warming, if left unchecked, will, at minimum, devolve the world into decades of depression.
Look, all you have to do is check what the cost of a typically strong hurricane levies on any given community. Now, even low-balling the effect of global warming on the production of more numerous hurricanes to double the norm will show that the cost is massive and unsustainable. Anyone residing in a locale where they may face the destruction of their home in one out of every five years will eventually get a clue and relocate. How will they find housing and employment in areas already burdened by a paucity of those requisite elements?
Here’s a valid guess: crime will steeply rise. Frightening inflation will become the norm. Social unrest will grow. More wars will be fought over limited resources. We will move closer to the likelihood of genocide to seize the resources of others. Coral reefs will continue their OBVIOUS die-off, thus killing the fishing industry. Those with wealth will hide behind ever higher walls, fearful of the general populace. Eventually no wall will hold back the anger. Everyone will be angry and we who struggle to take action now will NOT find any satisfaction in saying I told you so. All we will feel is deep shame for the supidity of our species and bemoan the fact that humanity had rejected logic and reason for sefl-destructive greed.
August 10th, 2006 at 6:06 pm“The Top of the World is Melting”
August 10th, 2006 at 6:08 pmSo , they are saying that ” please don’t start no crap with that stupid old fart ” and that TP should mess with them instead because ” we’re alot smarter than you ” even though they had a stupid old fart on c-span spreading missinformation , all the while recieving monies from big oil . If I was them I’d just blame the stupid old fart .
August 10th, 2006 at 6:20 pmHowdy Armando,
Nice post and all too true.
I’m a typical American mutt, part everything, including a hefty dose of native-American Caw. I used to live in Mexico and whatever fear I may have been expected to have as a white American in a brown world vanished when associating with the blindingly aware Mexican intellectuals I call friend. I simply cannot understand a fear of diversity. It astounds me that the most racist people are the ones who never come into contact with the color of person they fear. I frankly thing a lot of that fear is guilt. Those white Americans clinging to some mythical time of perfection know they have a more than equal chance from birth. They fear retaliation. They fear culpability. Should they continue to harm others with their disenfranchising policies I say they deserve whatever they eventually get.
You are sadly right about the fear underlying these stinkers. ‘America is never, ever wrong. America is supposed to be a white, Christian nation with a manifest destiny over all other cultures and anything or anyone who questions that primacy is a villain needing eradication.’ What a sick crock of hooey. While I don’t believe we should just open our borders, solely because it allows nations like Mexico and Guatemala to continue dodging responsibility for their crappy and corrupt governance, I have zero concern about the erosion of white America’s supposedly God-given moral, cultural and spiritual supremacy.
Reagan was a true criminal, although he is a statesman when compared to Bush Jr. By belittling political correctness as a sympton of liberal wimpishness, a goal that does have a noble purpose though sometimes poorly proposed, Reagan made racism and sexism okay again. We saw the insane rise of street gangs and graffiti during Reagan’s tenure as he hobbled inner cities. Reagan, like all his ilk, just did not give a damn about the poor, who are disproportionately members of minority groups. All Bush has done is taken that contempt for the less than fabulously wealthy to a whole new level. Bush and his kind may not be racists but they do little to prove otherwise. In their case, color only disappears when bank accounts reach a certain level. Even then, they give mere lip service to respecting diverrsity. Look how readily Colin Powell was disregarded. That is symptomatic how Bush honors those who have genuine and meaningful life experience.
I treat all others as equals not because it’s the right thing to do but because it’s now ingrained in my nature. I do, however, proudly hold onto a bigotry toward idiots, racists, sexists and speed-addicts. But having a fear that our landscape will no longer be majority white and lose its nostalgia for the 1950’s when minorities “knew their place”? Uh-uh. Not a whit.
August 10th, 2006 at 6:38 pmGiven the actual documented effects of the global warming effects we are currently experiencing, it is clear that scientists are under-estimating the damage to our earth from increased CO2 in the atmosphere. Ice is melting faster than anticipated, cubic miles of ocean near Oregon is found devoid of oxygen and animals are dying by the millions, unpredicted heat waves are ravaging the world.
At some point, those that misinform the world populace about global warming are doing a great violence on mankind. That includes the trolls here. At some point those who live in the reality-based world will be forced to defend ourselves against those who, through idological blinders and idiocy, do violence on us.
August 10th, 2006 at 6:43 pmremember, these folks are used to speaking to their constituents and investors. the common clay, the salt of the earth, morons.
August 10th, 2006 at 6:55 pmthey don’t expect anyone to challenge their statements of fact. and since they can’t stomach truth, they will blather about it rather than own up.
Hey Five,
Well said.
We keep skirting around the eventual outcome of doing nothing about global warming. Take a look at history when societies were stressed by the environment. The Maya vanished as a supreme culture overnight. Most achaeologists believe their rapid collapse was due to excessive slash and burn in poor soils that eventually resulted in mass famine in a society dependent on corn. Hungry hordes took their anger out on their leaders. That same scenario, bad management of the environment, has ended just as badly for various cultures all through human history. Not once did the mismanagment of the environment lead to long-term prosperity. Europe only emerged from the Dark Ages after the plague killed so many fellow citizens that it freed enough resources for the survivors to flourish. The plague Bush and his kind bring closer every day is the kind of global violence that will kill billions.
The ultimate outcome of sitting on our hands will be worldwide revolution.
August 10th, 2006 at 6:59 pmNobody cares if George Soros does or does not fund Think Progress. We just don’t care.
August 10th, 2006 at 7:05 pm——————
If I had the money,I’d fund a half-dozen sites such as this one.
I’d start a cable television network devoted exclusively to exposing the spin,lies, and unethical/criminal behavior of the right–ratings be damned!
excellent smackdown TP. let’s hope they take up the challenge!
August 10th, 2006 at 7:08 pmJudd,
I was wondering about ThinkProgress’ collective well-being.
Has CRC’s “shock and awe” campaign begun yet? Have you all scaped, unscathed, the raw force of CRC’s “intellectual firepower”?
What I think is really funny is that Capital Research Center is having a hissy fit because you didn’t mention their book -as if that changed anything at all regarding Cohen’s claim and your rebuttal.
August 10th, 2006 at 7:18 pmTP Judd wasn’t listening to the C-SPAN program very closely. There are no climate scientist who think human activity and emissions from burning fossil fuel are driving climate change, in other words, the main factor in climate change. TP Judd can’t find one serious scientist who does.
Very clever, Judd. You’ve managed to fool the TP robots into believing the argument you placed in Cohen’s mouth. Unfortunatley, it’s not what he said.
And TP Judd has a problem with the fossil fuel industry’s involvement in the understanding of climate change? Well maybe he would like to discard chapters 3 and 13 of the IPCC 2001 report. H.S. Kheshgi of Exxon’s Mobil Research and Engineering Company is the lead or co-author for those chapters. Can’t trust IPCC since they receive support and input from Exxon can you?
August 10th, 2006 at 7:29 pmpardon me, that’s Chapters 3 and 12.
August 10th, 2006 at 7:57 pmHippie;
Did you look at this site?
It explains global warming denials to the meanest intelligence.
http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 02/ how-to-talk-to-global-warming-sceptic.html
Most climate scientists think human activity is responsible for global warming. Another nice site is http://www.realclimate.org
August 10th, 2006 at 9:44 pmCohen guy in the pic looks like he is almost blind as a bat, or just blinded in his brain cavity > lol.
August 11th, 2006 at 12:52 am[…] Even when we are having enough evidences on global warming, why we are not taking right steps or working towards green fuels ? read this: Groups Attacking Global Warming Science Attack ThinkProgress […]
August 11th, 2006 at 1:17 amI don’t know about you, but we have the choice to purchase green energy from our utility company. Something Al Gore should consider doing.
August 11th, 2006 at 1:24 amSkeptic, true or false. Scientist who study climate have a very good understanding of all radiative forcings.
True or false. CO2 is the primary gas affecting climate change.
Over 20 years, what gas has more warming potential? Methane or CO2.
True or False. Today’s climate is influenced by events that happened as much as 30 years ago.
Final question. What is the natural variabilty of temperature over the past 400,000 years?
Final question. What is 400 divided by 4.5 billion?
No, one more. Having 60-90% certainty is solid enough to use as a basis for cognative reasoning? Pretend like you’re a scientist.
August 11th, 2006 at 1:44 amGiven the issues complexity, we are compelled to look to the experts for the lead on this subject.
The outliers almost without exception have clear ties to the oil and gas lobby, and must be dismissed as tainted. The rather odd bird highlighted in this segment is a classic example.
Until the consensus shifts, nothing an agenda heavy right wing nut bag has to say, should sway anyone. Their agenda is clear, the palable political panic in the GOP is what is driving the current hysterical pushback on reality. They have been on the wrong side of this discussion from day one, and they were obviously terribly, terribly wrong. Nontheless, reality has a nasty habit of reasserting itself:-)
August 11th, 2006 at 8:46 amIf the networks were doing their jobs, people like Cohen would be deemed nuts and would never be considered as suitable guests for a serious news program.
Oh, that’s right, we live in America, where the news is what giant coprporations want it to be and shouting matches are king. What was I thinking.
August 11th, 2006 at 10:19 amHoney Dipper;
August 11th, 2006 at 10:21 amYou are asking questions which are not in my realm of expertise. If you have a thesis why don’t you present it? The Socratic method is rather useless if no one has any idea of your underlying concept.
Have you looked at http://www.realclimate.org? I was very impressed by the clarity of their work and their dillegence to detail.
The real players in Washington DC, those who have profitted from the last 6 years are happy as clams when we liberals & other get so caught up in, Global Warming, the War in Iraq, the war on American freedoms etc.
Because they misdirect us and eat up our energy on the symptoms & misconstrue or lose focus on the cause of this deadly disease that has placed these traitors of American Liberty in power. It’s not just Republicans, the Democrats have gone along too.
Remember, this started downhill with the srealing in public of the 2000 presidential election. Yeah, when Gore walked/ran away real quite like, so his attempt to get in front of Global Warming, rightious as it is, makes him a non player in the real battle. He’s already shown his worth in battle. zit.
Now the battle returns, that’s the one where all of us Americans start running real people who will fight for a better America, elect better individuals with real strenght of character & consciencious. with loyalty only to the people.
America, in our history as a Nation, has fallen before, though maybe we wrote about it in a glowing afterlight, but rebounded when the chance came.
So thanks to TP et al out there now, let us take back that which was taken, and unlike them make it better. Every step adds to the journey, we’ve got many steps to make to get close to what this Nation, this world could have been. But it doesn’t have to be what it’s becoming. We can change history again in Nov 06, and in Nov 08, do it.
Talk with everyone, friend & foe,not about singular issues but the whole thing at once, they used our political correctness and openess against us, and we backed off, NO MORE. Echoing each other isn’t the way to get the facts out there, but forcing the RED States to see the mess Bush Inc. sells ain’t easy but it is working. Let’s see how they try to steal the next one, and if we again let them.
If we let them take our government from us again without a real bloody fight, then America this is what we want????? Then Global Warming, unnecessary wars, genocide, arsenic in the water, deforestation, graft, corruption, profit for the few, poverty, etc. are OK?????
August 11th, 2006 at 2:00 pm#93, “honey dipper”– Could you ask more misleading questions? How many people at your hack factory did it take to dream those up? Too bad those people couldn’t use their minds to actually helps their fellow citizens, instead of aiming to confuse them…
August 11th, 2006 at 2:12 pmJJ;
August 11th, 2006 at 2:55 pmThe main problem with Honey Dipper’s questions is that I can’t see their relevance. What do these questions have to do with Global Warming? Are these lead ins to a flat earth theory?
They have no relevance and they’re trick questions. He wants someone to try to answer them and then wants to jump on the person who answers whether they’re wrong or right.
For instance, he wants me to concede that the climate over the last 400 years has been variable, cyclical. Well yeah, and the cycles track to the CO2 levels. He then wants me to concede that over the past 4.5 billion years the climate has been variable and has not tracked to CO2 levels. Well no kidding, over the past 4.5 years tons of things happened that have absolutely nothing to do with CO2 levels but affected the climate, such as continental drift.
This is the kind of silliness they think up at hack factories like Tech Cetnral Station and the Heritage Foundation.
August 11th, 2006 at 3:39 pm(Sorry, should be 400 thousand years…)
August 11th, 2006 at 3:44 pmF$*@ ‘em. Let ‘em. Sue. Actually, I really, really, REALLY hope they do sue. How stupid are these people. Aren’t there any lawyers,or anybody who watches Law & Order even, on their side.
Little thing called “discovery” would be a joy to see …
Idiots on science
Idiots on the law
Appears all they’re good for is converting Oxygen to CO2 …. Thus making the problem worse! Bastards!
Oh sweet Jebus I hope they sue … please let me know so I can donate to your defense fund.
August 11th, 2006 at 4:07 pmJJ
August 11th, 2006 at 4:27 pmThanks. I thought it would be something immaterial and it was. The problem isn’t that global temperatures have a natural cycle, the problem is most of the evidence shows that human produced C02 and other gases is altering that cycle. The Earth should be on the cooling end of a natural cycle not getting gradually hotter.
I still think Honey Dipper is being really stupid. What do True and False questions have to do in global warming? Some of the questions can’t be answered in black and white.
When are we going to see this “intellectual firepower” anyway?
August 11th, 2006 at 5:00 pmCAPITAL RESEARCH CENTER’S RESPONSE TO THINK PROGRESS made be read here.
August 11th, 2006 at 7:57 pmI meant, “MAY” be read here.
August 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pmThat last poster using my name wasn’t me. These people give me the creeps.
The case for human induced climate change is very straightforward and comes from a number of sources:
http://www.heatisonline.org/ contentserver/ objecthandlers/ index.cfm?id=3458&method=full
That’s why the NAS and IPCC leave little room for doubt on that. But as was the case with big tobacco, they’re just trying to make the straightforward seem complicated. “Doubt is our product” as one tobacco executive once said. As I mentioned above, it’s interesting that Cohen once shilled for big tobacco.
How the heck do these people sleep at night? That’s what I want to know.
August 12th, 2006 at 12:20 amHey, Where are all the destructive Hurricaines this year? Is Gore holding them back for political purposes?
BTW, the Levees in Louisianna were built years ago under, and maintained mostly by, a predominantly democrat state government.
August 13th, 2006 at 7:20 am…maintained mostly by, a predominantly democrat state government.
With federal funds, and with the US Army Corps of engineers, which answers to the federal government.
Climate change makes stronger storms more likely. You can look at a number of studies that show this happening. This does not mean that any one year is going to have tons of storms.
August 13th, 2006 at 1:16 pmWith federal funds, and with the US Army Corps of engineers, which answers to the federal government.
False. With federal, state and local funds. Parish’s and Levee and Conservation districts have just as much or are mostly responsible for maintaining and operating levees. They request funds to fund their projects. The USACOE also designs and builds projects in coordination with state and local districts. Many projeccts have been in the works for 5, 10, 15 years. Politicians representing hurricane areas have a big responisibilty for getting funds to the Districts and the Corp. Parish’s and state politicians have a lot of responsibility here.
Climate change makes stronger storms more likely.
False. The IPCC did not make that conclusion.
Define “more likely”, more than 50% chance?
BTW, the answers to those questions can be found in the IPCC report. You would also be expected to understamd those concepts in an upper division climate section. You failed your first climate quiz. Next time pretend you’re a scientist, not an advocate.
August 13th, 2006 at 3:40 pm[…] Think Progress, DC - Aug 10, 2006First, the National Center for Public Policy Research accuses us of libel for suggesting that Cohen receives funding from the fossil fuel industry. … Continue […]
August 13th, 2006 at 10:08 pmWith federal, state and local funds.
Of course. If you read what I said I was correcting the person who implied it was only a state and local responsibility.
The IPCC did not make that conclusion.
The IPCC will issue a report in several months. Undoubtedly it will take into account studies like those mentioned in this post:
http://www.desmogblog.com/ lindzen-keeps-it-complicated-and-the-wall-street-journal-laps-it-up
Next time pretend you’re a scientist, not an advocate.
I don’t pretend to be anything, unlike the “trust-us-we’re-experts” flacks referred to in Judd’s post.
August 14th, 2006 at 7:53 amOf course. If you read what I said I was correcting the person who implied it was only a state and local responsibility.
Brian didn’t imply that maintaining levees was ONLY a state and local reponsibility, he said MOSTLY, which is true. Your correction was false.
None of the studies linked via Rob Gelbspan (a lying propagandist who still refers to himself as a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and is not a scientist, but a retired journalist and advocate) support your claim that climate change makes stronger storms more likely.
Besides, you still haven’t defined more likely.
Interestingly, you now want to base your theory on a prediction of conclusions on what the next IPCC report will tell us. Let me guess what they will say. It is impossible to compare storms to the historical record because we do not have accurate data that measures storm intensities prior to the 1980’s.
August 14th, 2006 at 4:30 pmIt’s interesting that denialists are now touting the IPCC. Not very long ago it wasn’t that way:
http://www.prwatch.org/node/5083
It’s Ross Gelbspan. And his bio on his website says that “he conceived, directed and edited a series of articles that won a Pulitzer Prize in 1984.”
He’s got a page where he describes the Pulizer issue:
http://www.heatisonline.org/ contentserver/ objecthandlers/ index.cfm?id=3605&method=full
There are plenty of studies pointing to climate change causing stronger storms. This Realclimate post explains it:
http://www.realclimate.org/ index.php/ archives/ 2005/ 09/ hurricanes-and-global-warming/
August 14th, 2006 at 6:11 pmHmmm, now you’re ignoring the findings of the IPCC?
There is no compelling evidence to indicate that the
August 14th, 2006 at 6:49 pmcharacteristics of tropical and extratropical storms have
changed. Changes in tropical storm intensity and frequency
are dominated by interdecadal to multidecadal variations,
which may be substantial, e.g., in the tropical North Atlantic.
Owing to incomplete data and limited and conflicting
analyses, it is uncertain as to whether there have been any
long-term and large-scale increases in the intensity and
frequency of extra-tropical cyclones in the Northern
Hemisphere. Regional increases have been identified in the
North Pacific, parts of North America, and Europe over the
past several decades. In the Southern Hemisphere, fewer
analyses have been completed, but they suggest a decrease in
extra-tropical cyclone activity since the 1970s. Recent
analyses of changes in severe local weather (e.g., tornadoes,
thunderstorm days, and hail) in a few selected regions do not
provide compelling evidence to suggest long-term changes.
In general, trends in severe weather events are notoriously
difficult to detect because of their relatively rare occurrence
and large spatial variability.
Search for Gelbspan here:
http://pulitzer.org/index.html
You won’t find him. Do you think he’s exaggerating about his Pulitzer Prize just like he’s exaggerating the facts on climate change?
August 14th, 2006 at 7:50 pmRealclimate represents the latest on hurricanes and climate change. Take a look at their contributors. They’re all the best, most published in their field.
Gelbspan was right about climate change long before the mainstream media, and also did a lot of valuable work about industry PR campaigns. Click the links on Gelbspan and you’ll get the story about the Pulitzer. (I’m not going to argue with someone who isn’t even inclined to research enough to click a link, so this will be my last comment.)
August 14th, 2006 at 9:43 pmLolita Lolita Pics Lolita Models
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 5:52 pmPay Day Loans
Hows anthemion pay day loan for Correctional Officers
March 15th, 2008 at 1:18 amLolita Little Lolita 6 12 Lolita Portal
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 15th, 2008 at 7:05 pmEric
Brilliant information and great site to visit. Informative and attractive layout.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:04 pmNaked Girls Naked Black Men Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 9:22 pmNaked Girls Beyonce Naked Naked Teen Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 12:51 amInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:43 amdeep cycle battery
Good post. I am looking into these issues on my blog.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:10 pmHealth Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 9:07 amYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 2:20 amKds Bbs Pics Childporn Underage Nudist
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 7:21 pmNaked Girls Naked Young Girl Naked Teen Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 10:50 pm