NASA SUED OVER LIES OF CLIMATE GATE !!! GLOBAL WARMING HOAX PONZI SCHEME !!!

[ReverendBrownbuttock]

Oh how nice. A Big Oil/Big Coal/Big Automobile funded lawyer who distrusts climate scientists on Fox and Friends.

[pineappleseer]

FOX TV ALSO BELONGS TO THE NWO. Playing one against the other and then in end total manipulation!!!All life infiltrated. New in numerlogy 666 -Satan not person.Research illuminate, free masons, satanists, bilderberg rothschild,rockafeller,. Also they are responsible for christians hating other religion groups and the other way around...they dont care wnat us to kill each other.weaken us and then bring in martial law. NASA belongs to NWO as CNN and ALL MEDIA advertisingetc.

[mooners40]

why nasa? who controls things? those who control use nasa - - to further an agenda - for taxes for a fake warming - man is not the cause - the sun is - and now we are in a global cooling period -  no carbon taxes should be allowed - it's a scam

[olympic66power]

this guy is off his rocker data of nasa noaa and all the other science agency world wide for decades have been watching and projecting this global warming effects if interested on sciences up to date findings go to RSOE site on line and stop listening to this bs follow the fact not the crap

[noobler9]

@Internetwanker well, I don't think it's even a big deal to say someone in the business world would have it out for the climate change science stuff, of course I'm also the kind of guy who notes conspiracy theories and points out that europe as late as world war 1 was under the control of monarchs who essentially make up one big family

 didn't stop them from feuding anyways, big enough families don't care for each other as much and people in power get and stay there through cunning/strongarming

[noobler9]

@noobler9 my point is, the most wonderful sounding conspiracy could even be true, and it'd be old news, and not worth much attention xD

[noobler9]

@Internetwanker it IS true that someone would have had to have leaked the emails or they'd have to have been released, who did it and why IS up for questioning, actually do they know already? I haven't checked that one out, but then I'm not making any assumptions based on that so I'm good for now oh I see what you're getting at, some jackass in a company wants to discredit scientists so they start up a "climategate" scare, yea that's reasonable

[noobler9]

@Internetwanker what, their strategy is to honestly discuss issues in private and get misrepresented BADLY by morons who claim they're in on a conspiracy? yea okay I can go with THAT "conspiracy theory"

[noobler9]

it would help if people actually read the emails, and then make their own judgements instead of arbitrarily listening to raving lunatics and morons, so go read the emails yourselves and then come around and make a decision, there's 200 fucking emails, and you think pulling 2-3 out of an entire conversation will give the entire picture? shame on you?

[noobler9]

just to give a heads up, when they say "manipulate the data" that is not even CLOSE to meaning what you think it means what they are talking about, is manipulating data by removing things that would give the wrong impression about what it leads to, for instance, "the data" was it were might consist of one year's temp readings to add multiple years into a graph, that is manipulation of data technically, and these people talk in very technical terms like this

[noobler9]

@noobler9 manipulation has two meanings, change stuff around, no biggy there, your hand manipulates the keyboard, nothing sinister there is there? and then there's the whole "conspiracy theory" kind of manipulation, psychological manipulation the emails refer to the first type, not the second type yes, scientists are allowed to use the technical meanings when dealing with science, and no it doesn't mean they're out on a conspiracy don't be stupid.

[Broskiekeagan]

@shwangshwing stfu

[ShwangShwing]

NASA isn't sued. That's misleading title.

[KevinKirschner55]

Hey "noobler9", do you think your incoherent rants laced with profanity give you any credibility whatsoever? You merely expose yourself for what you are... another liberal, progressive, "trying-to-run-everybody's-lif­e" nitwit nutjob!

[noobler9]

@KevinKirschner55 how did I miss this? an insane babbling attempt to call me something I'm not by a moron who thinks swearing isn't a function of intensity, but rather a denotation that someone is unintelligent my my, where COULD you have gotten such childish notions? ooh, nevermind, it's a natural part of growing up, I think the standard age of that kind of thing was 12 :>

[noobler9]

@KevinKirschner55 just go read the fucking emails, freak

[noobler9]

woops, I have no idea why I was thinking matt horner, this guy's name is chris horner

ehh, I messed up the names, woops

[IcedPhoenix666]

@noobler9 Because you play Starcraft 2.

[noobler9]

@IcedPhoenix666 funny story that, I WANT to play starcraft 2 but need to upgrade my computer still, just waiting for it, but I do love to see starcraft matches, it's like the new version of a chess match for today's day and age~

[noobler9]

instead, we have a puke spouting garbage on the news, knowing full well he doesn't have to back up any claims, instead he just gives soundbyte length crap about how nasa's horrible, and how bad it is, and all this sort of rhetoric

he hasn't given an ounce of believable argument in this crap

[noobler9]

secondly, they took readings from different areas, so any "fudging of numbers" and bullshit, is really because 15 degrees celcius on a weather balloon/satellite is not the same as at ground level, the raw data was freely available, this bullshit researcher could've done his own work, and if it showed errors in their judgement, he could publish it openly

he's not even a real scientist, a researcher is just that, it can be the hobo off the street, or lying scumbag, and he has no credentials

[noobler9]

sorry, I can't find the video, it's in the stanford section, or berkely, or google tech talks, or one of those things, that isn't a shameless sensationalist outlet

the guy complains about this matt horner fellow, unless there's another guy who's hyping up denial of climate change, anyways, the deal is that they published the data, someone disagreed, however those people who disagreed did the math wrong, they fixed the math and found it was pretty much in agreement that there's a rising trend

[noobler9]

matt horner is a terrible dude with no credentials and his "proof" is shit, I can't find the video but there's an hour long presentation by the dude macintyre or whoever what proof does matt horner have for doubts, the data is openly available, and that the degree of information required and time spent on dredging up every piece of communications is overkill, matt whorner

if matt horner is really interested in the science/truth part, he will accept the raw data and make his own calculations

[Chrisfre]

Between the muslim outreach top priority and screwing around with the climate data...NASA has really gone off a cliff.

[robertanchor]

Im not a follower of politics, but even I knew the "Global Warning" issue was BS. Gore or almost any of these politicians would say anything if it meant a fat check in their pockets. Its also comical that one day Gore is a vice president, the next he's an expert on climatology

[ludocrat]

And then it snowed. And snowed and snowed and snowed.

Proven junk science, but the suicidal AGW belief system is still very much alive, in Europe and in the USA. Defeating that death cult will be a severe test of the civilisation of which sane folk are rightly proud.

[khatool]

@ludocrat Yeah, it snowed in places it wasn't supposed to.

Luckily for those AGW guys, that kind of, you know, SUPPORTS global warming.

[jerbiebarb]

@khatool Where do you think the energy comes from for unusual weather? A less energetic planet? Wake up!

[jerbiebarb]

@ludocrat That's what our warming planet will do. Harder winters, hotter drier summers, more floods, stronger hurricanes and none at all - droughts in the SE, because of a strong, long duration, longwave in place of the eastern half of the ConUS. It's all in the planetary waves, we've already seen some of it. You deniers will deny that the planet rotates.

[citizenschallengeYT]

PS... Horners baloney suit never happened because it was never more than hot air.

just more PR BS !

[citizenschallengeYT]

What amazing garbage. Chris Horner is a fraud.

To claim that weather satellites where sent up because of fears of global cooling (0:35) is a pure lie.

Why do these folks only have hot air and never real facts or statistics to support their contrarian notions. ?

And why do you folks lie so easily?

Look at the data -- actually try to learn something rather than keeping your heads stuffed up for faith-based mythologies.

GT yes! East coast snow storms are consistent with AGW expectations!

[iceisnice61]

In Canada the Kool Aid drinking "Chichen Littles" are completely OUT OF THEIR MINDS. Does matter what facts are presented, and how their LYING Gods, AL Gore, David Susuki et al are PROVEN to be wrong, they just scream louder and call people names (thats when I know something is up).

Hell in BRITISH COLUMBIA (for all you Illminati fans out there) we are paying Carbon Taxes

[judomagyar]

Can you save Al Gore?

watch?v=LBCRStksqL0&feature=re­lated

[19il]

popcorn

[fringelife]

lol another attempt to sue NASA, but only attempt we never see anyone actually do this because they never have a case. It just makes a great story for Fox News to sell to climate deniers. No scientists have been charged with any crime, we just hear of attempts to sue. Try actually gaining something called evidence, which climate scientists actually have done and continue to do.

[judomagyar]

@fringelife there is plenty of evidence that shows that there is no correlation between the crowing CO2 concentration and whatever is happening to global temperatures.

[judomagyar]

Hungarian Physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi proves CO2 emissions irrelevant in Earths Climate (January 12, 7:34 AM Examiner Dianna Cotter)

Dr. Zagoni explains: Since the Earths atmosphere is not lacking in greenhouse gases [water vapor], if the system could have increased its surface temperature it would have done so long before our emissions. It need not have waited for us to add CO2: another greenhouse gas, H2O,was already to hand in practically unlimited reservoirs in the oceans.

[jerbiebarb]

@judomagyar water? From where can more water be released from? From the crust?

[judomagyar]

@jerbiebarb

OK, here it is rephrased:

....another greenhouse gas H2O in gas form, commonly known as water vapor, was already at hand in practically unlimited liquid form reservoir called the OCEANS.

The liquid water is in practically unlimited amount.

Got it?

[jerbiebarb]

@judomagyar No it isn't. I'll lend you a textbook on dynamical meteorology.

[judomagyar]

@jerbiebarb

yea!

Fish are complaining about the scarcity of water in the oceans. Now we are down to 1.5 billion km3

And the Bedouin are complaining about the lack of sand in the Sahara.

[jerbiebarb]

@judomagyar As the planet heats up the atmosphere will be able to hold more and more water vapour. This feedback effect doesn't scare you? You're brave.

[judomagyar]

@jerbiebarb

1) if the planet heats up a little (a few tenths of a degrees) yes, there will be more gaseous water in it Unless it is above a desert.

2) W e are at the beginning of a cooling trend. This is apparent looking at the data set: stochastic data superimposed on a 12 year cycle which is superimposed on a 60 year long cycle, which is superimposed on e 1600 year cycle, etc...

[jerbiebarb]

@judomagyar If there's more water vapour in the atmosphere the planet will heat more and then it will hold more due to hydrostatic equilibrium.

Three natural cycles are keeping us from warming disastrously right now. When they reverse we will warm to the century's uptrend and quickly past it. What do think has caused the 12 yr cycle and when do you think it will reverse? But more importantly, why is anybody denying this?

[judomagyar]

@jerbiebarb

11-12 year cycle; actually, they come in pairs so we can call them 22 year cycles are coming from the sun's magnetic activity (sun spots). Right now the next cycle is very late, barely any sunspots what so ever. This in the past correlated with cooling.

More gaseous H2O will form more clouds that produce more shade, blocking more of the sun's energy from getting down to ground level.

Lindzen showed with satellite data that a runaway greenhouse effect can not happen on our planet.

[jerbiebarb]

@judomagyar Now there's sonar evidence of a jet 2000 miles within the photosphere of the Sun showing a 17 year periodicity and this cycle has already lengthened the normal 11 yr magnetic cycle to 13 yrs. If this torsional phenomenon lengthens and intensifies the solar maximum as much as it's delayed the solar minimum we'll have something else to worry about.

H2O cools and insulates.

What did Lindzen say about the data?

[judomagyar]

@jerbiebarb

Lindzen:

watch?v=OS-cLp1PEGQ

If you don't want to watch the whole thing, go to 4:00

He is talking to other scientists.

[MuseLogic]

Science is the new medieval religion.

It lies and makes up new lies in refusing to hear heretics.

[archgin742000]

I agree with you. There is nothing wrong in science though, neither religion. The problem is that we give these "scientist" and science too much credit and power that we fail to analyze issues ourselves. Worse of all, tend to believe what the media is saying without questioning. Our sense of free will and vigilance has somehow eroded. Like you said, we are in a "scientific superstition". We believe in everything they said as long there are words like "data" "reseach" "science" etc.

[samwst56]

@MuseLogic Those words of your are excellent. Dang! Wish I'd said that. Cheers!

[GuybrushThreebwood]

As if AGW even needed another nail in it's coffin at this point, I think the record breaking snow pretty much wraps it up for global warming.

[sporque325]

@GuybrushThreebwood

I agree with you, but i read an article yesterday blaming the record snow on global warming. The truth can't win for losing.:)

[GuybrushThreebwood]

Yes, that's what they are saying n(never predicted before) that AGW causes snow!

Here's the point

No scientist ever contended that Co2 itself could directly drive climate. It was all about those infamous 'Positive Feedback Loops'

One of, if not THE principle feedback needed to multiply a trace of Co2 into disaster?

The 'albedo effect'

whereby more heat= less snow =less energy reflection=less snow and so on

DEC 09 2nd greatest global snow cover on record(Rutgers)!

oops!

[sporque325]

@GuybrushThreebwood

i found the article again. It's on yahoo and is a Time article. It says that the warmer air has more moisture and if the northern areas dip below 32 the moisture will turn to snow. The article quotes a 2003 article from Journal Climate. I'm sure they're not biased at all. :)

[GuybrushThreebwood]

The extra precip from global warming, if it ever happened is true. Although very slight-One of the many benefits. But record snow COVER also needs record cold over land masses where it falls-

Ave DC Jan high temp is well above freezing

i.e. global warming would cause more rain, not snow. Which would be great!

Fresh water, Co2, warmth= pretty much the three most important things for life on Earth?

[jerbiebarb]

@GuybrushThreebwood No, weather patterns will shift, so that some regions will be flooded and some will be desiccated. 'Not good.

[jerbiebarb]

@GuybrushThreebwood It's not the avg high temps, it's the temps brought with the short wave (the synoptic scale tropospheric disturbance).  Ask a weather hobbyist you trust.

[jerbiebarb]

@GuybrushThreebwood Most record-breaking weather events in the news recently might have been caused by the excess energy of GW, but if not, they WILL in the near future. Every record breaking event from blizzards to droughts requires more than normal weather pattern energy.

[acidgawd999]

@XMrAverageX

You might wanna read this article written back in 2005 that explains that the atmosphere is warming at around the rate predicted by the models.

tinyurl com / g2quv

[acidgawd999]

@XMrAverageX

An alternative adjustment introduced by Fu et al. (2004) finds trends (1979-2001) of +0.19 °C/decade when applied to the RSS data set. A less regularly updated analysis is that of Vinnikov and Grody with +0.20°C per decade (19782004). although it must be noted that RSS also has a higher trend when taken only to 2004 (+0.186 °C/decade)

[acidgawd999]

@XMrAverageX

Actually, I know that it doesn't.

To compare to the increase from the surface record (of approximately +0.07 °C/decade over the past century and +0.17 °C/decade since 1979) it is more appropriate to derive trends for the lower troposphere in which the stratospheric cooling is removed. Doing this, through July 2009:

RSS v3.1 finds a trend of +0.153 °C/decade.

UAH analysis finds +0.12°C/decade.

[acidgawd999]

You can mention it if you want but since you don't seem to have the slightest clue what you are talking about there isn't much point.

[acidgawd999]

I have already posted this:

"An enhanced greenhouse effect from CO2 has been confirmed by multiple lines of empirical evidence. Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2. Surface measurements find more downward infrared radiation warming the planet's surface. This provides a direct, empirical causal link between CO2 and global warming."

If you can't comprehend that then I can't help you.

[acidgawd999]

So either your comment is a non sequitur or it is too garbled for me to make it out.

[acidgawd999]

Right, and none of that discredits AGW.

[acidgawd999]

No, it means as usual a denier can't come up with any valid evidence to discredit AGW.

[acidgawd999]

Your comment are growing dimmer and dimmer.

[acidgawd999]

"When CO2 levels were higher in the past, solar levels were also lower. The combined effect of sun and CO2 matches well with climate."

Your denier talking points are getting rather tiresome.

[acidgawd999]

If you don't know the difference between weather and climate then this conversation might as well be over.

[acidgawd999]

"Water vapour is the most dominant greenhouse gas. Water vapour is also the dominant positive feedback in our climate system and amplifies any warming caused by changes in atmospheric CO2. This positive feedback is why climate is so sensitive to CO2 warming."

Lastly, proof exists only in mathematics, not in science. Whatever terminology you choose to use, however, there is overwhelming evidence that the current warming is caused by the rise in greenhouse gases due to human activities.

[acidgawd999]

"The CO2 that nature emits (from the ocean and vegetation) is balanced by natural absorptions (again by the ocean and vegetation). Therefore human emissions upset the natural balance, rising CO2 to levels not seen in at least 800,000 years. In fact, human emit 26 gigatonnes of CO2 per year while CO2 in the atmosphere is rising by only 15 gigatonnes per year - much of human CO2 emissions is being absorbed by natural sinks."

[acidgawd999]

No, this is the empirical evidence that has not been found to have bogus data behind it.

What evidence has bogus data behind it?

[acidgawd999]

Climate Audit is not a credible website. If NASA were to change historical data it would be because it was found that that historical data was inaccurate. Climate Audit did find that 1934 was the warmest year in the US but the US only compromises 2% of the globe. We are talking about global warming not regional warming. 1934 doesn't make the top five list for yearly global high temp.

tinyurl com / yl3uxsm

tinyurl com / yjpu46k

NASA remains one of the most reliable sources of temp. data.

[acidgawd999]

"An enhanced greenhouse effect from CO2 has been confirmed by multiple lines of empirical evidence. Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2. Surface measurements find more downward infrared radiation warming the planet's surface. This provides a direct, empirical causal link between CO2 and global warming."

[acidgawd999]

"A number of independent measurements of solar activity indicate the sun has shown a slight cooling trend since 1960, over the same period that global temperatures have been warming. Over the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been moving in opposite directions. An analysis of solar trends concluded that the sun has actually contributed a slight cooling influence in recent decades (Lockwood 2008)."

[JESUSISTHEONLYESCAPE]

HELLO BELOVED GLOBAL FELLOWS!

DEVIL'S WORSHIPPERS ARE EVERYWHERE IN THIS PLANET AND THEY ARE TRYING HARD TO CAUSE A BIG WORLDWIDE CRISES SO THEY CAN INTRODUCE THE ANTICHRIST TO THE HUMANITY.

NOBODY CAN STOP SATAN OTHER THAN JESUS.

PEOPLE IN USA AND OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS ABOUT TO COME!

TIME IS SO SHORT!

YOU MUST GIVE YOUR SOUL TO JESUS, OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE DEFEATED.

JESUS LOVEs YOU ALL!

[acidgawd999]

I would echo what charadester wrote and add that Lee Doren aka howtheworldworks is an even better example of the CEI's lack of credibility. Of course mentioning McIntyre is also a dead give away that this guy is full of shit.

[Thisawareness]

Global Warming is a pseudo-science like they had in the Soviet Union. The top three gurus for the Global Warming Cult are

A flake, who has a load of character, credibility & possible mental issues

A Railroad Engineer (Choo Choo Charlie) who is the chief quack of the quacks of the IPCC

Head of the CUEI is an economist with ties to the IMF

Yeah Global warming is a pseudo-science

These bums are more qualified working at an amusement park train ride

1984 Choo Choo!

INFORMATIONLIBERATION(DOT)com

[brandeis1000]

heavenstorne; wake up and look at everyone who is over 30 and realise that it is thanks to the industrial revolution.

[FreedomForMankind]

º°¨ ¸„ø¤º°¨„ø¤º°¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ º¤ø„¸

¨°º¤ø„ ¸ How about a world º¤ø„¸

¨°º¤ø„ ¸ without money º¤ø„¸

¨°º¤ø„ ¸ Governments, courts º¤ø„¸

¨°º¤ø„ ¸ religions and armies? º¤ø„¸

¸„ø¤º°¨¸„ø¤º „¸¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ ¸„ø¤º „¸¨°

[strom56]

The ten most common elements in our galaxy measured by mass, spectroscopically and starting with the most common element, Hydrogen. * Hydrogen -Taxed * Helium - Taxed * Oxygen - Taxed * Carbon - Yet To Be Taxed * Neon - Taxed * Iron - Taxed * Nitrogen - Taxed * Silicon - Taxed * Magnesium - Taxed * Sulfur - Taxed

[charadester]

If this gentleman is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, then no more need be said. He's as corrupt in one direction as anyone he criticizes is in the other. No credibility. No believability.

[syncro16se]

Science way apart from State/Government/UN

It's just totally corrupt with all the money they're relying on based on a LIE that the globe is reaching dangerous temperatures..

You're so right honestann

tell'em about the ice ! Ice builds up at the same time as large blocks / ice bergs fall off at the edges. That's a normal thing isn't it Thats what I learned in school at least.

Ice on the poles and galciers is continually pressed outwards from the middle and erodes at the edges like a pile of sand

[honestann]

1: higher temperatures cause CO2 increase, not the opposite.

2: temps have fallen the past 10 years while CO2 continues to rise.

3: periods of much warmer/cooler weather (and higher/lower CO2) have existed over 20,000+ years.

4: planets warm/cool together, which means warming/cooling is primarily caused by the sun.

We need 100% separation of science and state.

Government funded science == propaganda.

Plants absorb CO2 and emit O2.

Hang climate totalitarians.

End lies & pollution.

[majortom321]

but al Gore said your wrong.. Because Cap and Trade will help polar bears.

Dont you get it, The globe is warming because of a mysterious gas known as CO3!

We need to ban all Carbon molecules!

[acidgawd999]

@honestann

1. False, higher temps cause CO2 to increase and CO2 causes higher temps

2. False, as has been predicted, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the strong warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed to the effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases.

3. Periods in the past that had cooler temps when CO2 was high had other factors preventing higher temps.(cont.)

[acidgawd999]

(cont.)

4.  Complete bullshit, not all planets are warming - some are cooling. Of those that are warming, the reasons are largely known and are phenomenon unique to each planet.

What we need is an intelligent electorate so that scumbags like James Inhofe don't get elected.

[honestann]

4 is not BS, do your homework. Yes, to understand this issue is complex, because planets are in elliptical orbits and naturally get cooler and warmer as they get closer and further from the sun. This must be compensated for, by taking what normally occurs at any given point in the orbit and comparing it to what happens at the same point "this time around".

12 hour clocks are correct twice per day, and wackos like Inhofe are correct twice per lifetime, purely by coincidence or other motives.

[acidgawd999]

Number 4 IS bullshit because as I already stated the cause of warming is largely known and the phenomenon is unique to each planet.

For example, Martian climate is primarily driven by dust and albedo and there is little empirical evidence that Mars is showing long term warming.

"In recent decades while global temperature has been rising, the sun has shown a slight cooling trend. Sun and climate have been going in opposite directions during the last 35 years of global warming."

[honestann]

In the most recent decade, temperatures are falling, and even the CO2-alarmists acknowledge this (see "hide the decline").

Yes, I agree measurements of the other planets is difficult, since we're talking about fractions of a degree measured from 40-million+ miles away. However, the boundaries of martian polar caps are sensitive to small changes, and this is one way we can estimate. What makes this approach convincing is checking all plants, and this implies slight warming until about 2000.

[acidgawd999]

@honestann

The phrase "hide the decline" refers to the decline in the reliability of tree ring proxy data.

The 'other planets are warming' argument is a complete failure and I have already explained why.

[honestann]

@acidgawd999:

Okay, we agree to disagree. I hope you perform lots of research. Sometimes even I feel uncomfortable for not reviewing every last iota of evidence, but this simply isn't practical. The main reason is the difficulty of knowing the full context of observations (often not stated), which requires massive effort to investigate. I observed, researched and lived full-time IN a professional mountaintop observatory for many years, so I know first-hand about "difficult observations".

[ptangboy]

So is Global Warming a real threat or what?

I just heard on the weather channel that NASA has now been seen to manipulate their temperature recording methods. Something like they removed many thermometer recordings from generaly cold areas, eg. mountain tops. It also said that after no longer using the old sites that were generaly cold they still used the old temperature record for comparisions of temp change over time. If that is true then all bets are off on this topic.

[acidgawd999]

If you are referring to the Coleman/D'Aleo/Smith claims I do not believe they are accurate.

tinyurl com / ydbvsdp

[justaquicklook]

Wow acidgaw999, you seem really pissed.

I guess I'd be pissed too if I was financially involved in the biggest scam in the history of America.

Guess you should not have cashed in juniors college fund to buy Al Gore carbon credits.

Luckily the voice of America is beginning to silence you liars. If you think MA was a slap to cap and trade just wait until you see what happens this fall to Babs Boxer and her job killing green agenda.

[acidgawd999]

@justaquicklook

So all you have to present is meaningless prattle. Good job slipping in the red herring. I have no financial interests in anything having to do with the climate.