Just think about this. If it wasn't for us always fucking saving the day, you guys would all be doing goose step salutes to your fuhr while we are sipping whiskey and fucking hot chicks.
looooooooooool and this is coming from a man who knows a thing or two about arkansas. Yeah, what vessboy said! If I've learned anything from Hurricane Katrina, it's that poor people are poor because they're evil, lazy,and above all else, minorities.
German chicks aren't hot? Sure, you might have to be into black leather and bondage a bit, but i'm sure we could get around to that :p Just responded for the lols, seeing as I don't really have a problem with americans. Heh, even calling you "Americans" is almost a stereotype in itself seeing as the next person is like as not to be completely different.
Since I saw Chuck and this blond actress Yvonne Strahovski I know two things. First why Germany keeps invading Poland and second why so many germans have last names that end with ...wski.
You people are all crazy. In the words of Dave Chappelle, "My mouth my say a lot of racist things, but my penis is a humanitarian." Blonde, brunette, or bright green, if I see two D cups, I'm still gonna try and tap that.
btw. http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...&ei=REIjSsH5FqTWqAO8wP2XAw&q=GLENN+BECK&hl=en Global warming debate(the unpopular side)
a flaw in vessboys video: at a certain moment they show a map witht he countries that will not get to there kyoto goals i don't know anything about the other countries, but BELGIUM i know makes it a big effort, and should at least get an orange smilie, if not a yellow one because we do get each marker by trading greengasses with 3th world countries
uhhh vess. seriously, do you have any idea what it means when scientists globally agree that global warming is. There are people who would like it believed that there is a debate. But come on, that video wasn't even trying to give a balanced view. It was just "the green lobby hates america, they're crazy!" and "these men in suits are very serious. here are some facts which imply that global warming / kyoto etc arn't needed." I love (with dramatic music behind it) "all scientists are affected by bias. it's a fact." Implies so much very much... yet is misleading and means pretty much nothing. This video discusts me, either not ignorantly, it's just a prime example of misleading and giving people the wrong idea. okay, one thing that I personally have experience in the history of the "global cooling." This was a theory in the 1970's/80's, had a bit of evidence for it, and of course the media loved this. because like global warming, it predicted global... bad... things. um, anyway, the media got a lot of coverage of it. Then, because it was so interesting, a whole lot of scientists started redoing the results, testing it under all sorts of situations. And it didn't hold too much weight. That's what science does, it tests things and gets the facts straight. Then in the 1990s or whenever, a different group of scientists started to see evidence for a theory of global warming. So, scientists from across the globe started doing tests and checking the measurments made, of course this was proved to be wrong as- wait, no. oh shit. Anyway, that video is making it look like cooling was one scare and now they've changed it to warming. Can you see why this is misleading? Who the hell are you going to believe, talking heads, or god damn scientific institutes? Because I know which one does not have an agenda or very situational experience. also, "global warming causes... communism" which is a "quote" from an inconvenient truth. wow. Then after giving you a quick flash of Al gore having said about a dozen words, the presenter of the show says "lost among all the extreme rhetoric?"
<== Is a scientist. Man made global warming is an absolute fact, but horribly named. Climate science is a pseudoscience at this point, nobody knows that the hell is going to happen where. However, what is a physical chemistry is an absolute fact based science. If you knew anything about it, you would know that molecules absorb different wavelengths of energy. The more energy absorbed, the higher the temperature as we perceive it. As many of the people will tell you, the climate however is complex. Changes in balances can cause some places to get cooler, some warmer, some drier, some wetter. Therefore, it is best referred to as global climate change. The problem is no one knows exactly where things change to most and cause the most devastation, there are some ideas, but no one knows for sure. Secondly, if you won't believe the physical chemistry explanation I provided above, then I will tell you that even though the temperature readings on the ground have increased, the temperature reading in the atmosphere have decreased, which would be predicted with global warming and not a sun-based warming pattern. The energy is being captured closer to the ground, which suggests an increase in something that is doing the capturing. This is observational science not climatology. And Vess, if you want to try to prove a point, DO NOT EVER, EVER, bring a video by Glenn Beck. That guy is an idiot and is just poisoning the world with his backwards talk. He is actually making Americans stupider. People like him and hannity say things as though they are fact when they hardly are ever true or not just a crazy opinion. If you watch that show, you need to stop. Takes things out of context to say whatever he thinks it should say. He does not get paid to report the news and tell the truth, he is paid to entertain people with they think is fact while is really only telling them what they want to hear. As for Americans being stupid, I am one, and agree that a vast number of Americans are completely ignorant of everything, but not all.
opie who are you pointing at with that arrow? also i do agree on the nuclear power stance the video has! for some countries it could be the answer
Nuclear power isn't as dangerous by itself, but giving a country nuclear power plants can be dangerous. Relatively speaking, Nuclear Power is one of the cleaner ones. However, spent nuclear fuel is rather detrimental to people's health. Even if it's not weapons grade Plutonium or Uranium, there is still a possibility of a bomb that simply spreads the radioactive material around.
Its actually quite hard to turn nuclear material in a bomb of any sort. That's why only a handful of countries have them.
