China's Exploding CO2 Emissions

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Environment Forum » China's Exploding CO2 Emissions

Page 13 of 14 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14 Next

Author

Message

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:05 pm

Guest

On Apr 29, 4:49 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

China wouild do well to expand it's nucelar capacity, and exploit
Geothermal where possible.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

Let us expand it's nuclear capacity, a couple of boomers would give
them plenty of nuclear energy. Maybe not exactly what kind they want,
but it would be a lot of energy.

Actually the amount of energy liberated would be quite small. in
comparison to the enerty consumption of the Chinese state over 24 hours.

By by all means do so. The faster the AmeriKKKan state collapses the more
I like it.

I didn't want to reply to your Einstein post as it was way to long and
nonsense. Unless my memory fails me Einstein was a TEACHER. Because he
was Jewish he had a hard time getting any position, or even his
doctorate until he became well known. He was trained as a teacher of
physics and mathematics. As he was good at physics, that does not
make him an expert, or even knowledgable in the field of philosophy.
While we know he was pretty good at his profession, that is like
hollywood stars giving their opinions on politics. Just because they
are well known, and most can act very well, that doesn't mean they
know crap about politics. So, no, if you are stupid enough to listen
to Einstein about social issues, you are to dumb to talk to me. You
know less than nothing and say the most ignorant things I have read
(You don't take the prize, but close.) So, the U.S. will be here and
fine long after you are in your grave.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:10 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 3:57 am, Albert van der Horst <alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
wrote:

Quote:

In article <7205a50e-1623-426e-ac4a-d84af1baf...@34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,

veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 22, 10:15=A0pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
Why inconvenience 5.7 billion people when it is easier and more efficien> >t
to inconvenience 300 million AmeriKKKan worthless losers?

"Robert Blass" <bl...@messenger.xcx> wrote

That is the MAIN GOAL of the "omg al gore says" crowd.

=A0 Meanwhile Bush economic policies push Oil to $118 a barrel. And the
AmeriKKKan dollar to new lows against the Euro.

=A0 Talk about inconvenience.

Read Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman, they will explain it to you. It
isn't a inconvenience, it is an adjustment. We are exporting like
crazy, and the dollar will go back up. It's called "Free to Chose".
Free markets adjust as is needed all by themselves. Let oil go to 200
a barrel and see what happens. Nothing. Ken Hogan

Exporting what? Before exporting something, you have to
produce it.

Groetjes Albert

--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=nhttp://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm in the metals business, name it and we (my customers) are
exporting it. Except maybe corn, a really bad idea that has to be
stopped. But the exporting of finished metal goods is terrific right
now.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 3:12 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 3:55 am, Albert van der Horst <alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl>
wrote:

Quote:

In article <8f2996dd-2f0a-4116-9bbe-c10bfa4d5...@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,

veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 26, 10:45=A0pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:
AmeriKKKa running on borrowed money and borrowed time.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

We don't have to pay them if we don't want to.

=A0 You always have the option of becoming an outright thief. =A0Yes.

=A0 Is that your plan?

=A0 Ahahahahahahahah........

We can be, we stole the land from the Indians. Although they are
getting it back with gambling, tobbaco, and licence plate money. They
have turned the tables, but we did steal it from them and Mexico as
well, so why not? As it cost us about a 1/4 of a cent to turn out a
dollar bill, we can print all we want, and we get sent all these
goods. Good. And yeah, we can say we don't like you, we aren't
paying. So, better play nice!

That was the real reason for the war in Iraq.
Saddam wanted his oil payed in Euro's.

Ken Hogan

Groetjes Albert

--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=nhttp://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

They may be some day, but not for at least 10 or 15 years. There is
not enough Euro's to handle the business transactions. Make more, and
inflation hits you. The world isn't ready for the Euro as a business
transaction money.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:16 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 8:48 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

I'm in the metals business, name it and we (my customers) are
exporting it.

Here is a tiny list of things that the U.S. does not produce for export.

Oil. Natural Gas, Straw Brooms, Bananas, Pineapples, Opium, Cocaine,
Rubber, TV's, Monitors, Flat panel displays, OLED displays, Keyboards,
Refrigerators, Camera Lenses, Clean Newsprint paper, Bauxite, Bricks, .
Wrist watches, Poutine, Baloons, OpAmps, Kangaroos.

Flat panel displays, Refrigerators we do from Tulsa. Bauxite we did
in Arkansas. By the way, know where Bauxite is? Go outside, pick up
a hand of dirt, and there is some there. Bauxite is everywhere on the
Earth. Thank whatever Gods, or god that we exported you.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:26 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 8:53 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

Nope, sorry, you can't. Not only would it rip your nation in two, and
result in a civil war, it would result in an immediate retaliation from
everyone in the rest of the world.

And you would force <MY> hand, and several million AmeriKKKans would die
on that basis alone.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

Retaliation with what?

Train derailments, power outages, floods, fires, Crop rusts, scabs,
blights, sunken ships, etc.. etc.. etc...

And then there is the biological option.

I get it, you are all powerful god, and can do anything. We have the
people, have more guns in this country than there are people. Nobody
would be doing anything except being shot. The instutional nurse will
be by shortly to give you your meds, if she hasn't already. The only
thing you can kill is yourself. As for the biological option, let's
hope you've had a vasectomy. That's the only option in your hands.
You are a nut case, and this is my last post. You are mentally
disturbed, as I was warned. He was so right. I'll spend my little
writing time with people who live in reality. Hope they can help you,
modern medicines can do wonders.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:27 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 8:55 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

As a Republican party official, with a security clearance, I doubt my
name would be on any list that I would care about.

I'm sure you will hold a different opinion after your conviction for
treason, when the rope is around your neck.

No one will put a rope around my neck.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:29 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 8:56 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

Shuttle was originally planned to be able to service isocynchronous
satellites and place them in precise orbits - acting as a space service
platform.

However KKKongressional RepubliKKKans continually cut the funding for the
shuttle program until it was incapable of performing it's planned funciton
but still capable of servicing most of the Militarie's low orbiting
military
satellites.

Once the cost and unreliability of it's systems was demonstrated, the air
force - who had constucted a top secret launch facility for the shuttle
"fleet" abandoned the program entirely.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

Like I said, speak with Mr. Yeager about it

Like I said... You are a moron.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

and he will set you straight in a hurry and he knows a little more about
the program
than you do.

Yeager played no part in the shuttle program.

MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN

Yeah, tell him that and you won't be able to write that stupid MMMMM
stuff. He is old, and still tougher than hell. He lead the way and
retired a General, so I think he know more than you.

veritas

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 7:47 pm

Guest

On Apr 30, 9:03 pm, "V-for-Vendicar"
<Just...@ExecuteTheBushTraitor.com> wrote:

Quote:

Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.

"veritas" <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote

They may be some day, but not for at least 10 or 15 years.

The post death twitching of Uncle Sam might last 10 years.

No one gives a flying fuck about AmeriKKKa. We just keep burrying you.

I still didn't want to post on that long reprint of Einstein. You
said he wasn't a teacher. He was a teacher. I can write a piece on
Egypt lamps, but that doesn't mean I know what the hell I'm talking
about, as he doesn't. He was not a philosopher, he was in the physics
theory business. That doesn't provide him with the expertise to write
on social issues, just as movie stars don't have the expertise to
mouth off about politics (except one) but he was in politics longer
than he was an actor. He was famous, so someone printed it, so what?
He wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes with Rand. She would run him off
the stage. Our prosperity from '80 until 2000 was because they kept
with her philosophy. They have been drifting away, and who knows, the
peanut farmer days may come back if a Democrat is elected President.
Listening to Einstein about society and philosophy, a man who
abandoned his wife, and married his cousin is as looney as you get.
He may have known his physics, and mathematics (and even then had to
go to mathematic people for help), but as for Einstein and society and
life in general, you would be better off to pick the first ten people
in the phone book and get a better opinion then his.

As for burying America, as I said, you will be long in your grave and
we will still be on top. Live with it, you know-nothing.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:48 pm

Guest

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

I'm in the metals business, name it and we (my customers) are
exporting it.

Here is a tiny list of things that the U.S. does not produce for export.

Oil. Natural Gas, Straw Brooms, Bananas, Pineapples, Opium, Cocaine,
Rubber, TV's, Monitors, Flat panel displays, OLED displays, Keyboards,
Refrigerators, Camera Lenses, Clean Newsprint paper, Bauxite, Bricks, .
Wrist watches, Poutine, Baloons, OpAmps, Kangaroos.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:53 pm

Guest

Quote:

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

Retaliation with what?

Train derailments, power outages, floods, fires, Crop rusts, scabs,
blights, sunken ships, etc.. etc.. etc...

And then there is the biological option.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:55 pm

Guest

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

As a Republican party official, with a security clearance, I doubt my
name would be on any list that I would care about.

I'm sure you will hold a different opinion after your conviction for
treason, when the rope is around your neck.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:56 pm

Guest

Quote:

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

Like I said, speak with Mr. Yeager about it

Like I said... You are a moron.

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

and he will set you straight in a hurry and he knows a little more about
the program
than you do.

Yeager played no part in the shuttle program.

MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 8:59 pm

Guest

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

I didn't want to reply to your Einstein post as it was way to long and
nonsense.

MMMMMOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNN

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

Unless my memory fails me Einstein was a TEACHER.

MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN

Why Socialism?
by Albert Einstein

This essay was originally published in the first issue of Monthly Review
(May 1949).

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues
to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of
reasons that it is.

Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific
knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological
differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields
attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group
of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as
clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological
differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of
economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic
phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate
separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the
beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has-as is well
known-been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means
exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of
history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established
themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the
conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land
ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The
priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a
permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people
were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social
behavior.

But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really
overcome what Thorstein Veblen called "the predatory phase" of human
development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even
such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases.
Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance
beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its
present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.

Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science,
however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings;
science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But
the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals
and-if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous-are adopted and
carried forward by those many human beings who, half unconsciously,
determine the slow evolution of society.

For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and
scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should
not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express
themselves on questions affecting the organization of society.

Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society
is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered.
It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent
or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In
order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I
recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of
another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of
mankind, and I remarked that only a supra-national organization would offer
protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly,
said to me: "Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human
race?"

I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made
a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in
vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope
of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from
which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is
there a way out?

It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any
degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very
conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often
contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and
simple formulas.

Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a
solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those
who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his
innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and
affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to
comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only
the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting, strivings accounts
for the special character of a man, and their specific combination
determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner
equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite
possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main,
fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely
formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his
development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the
tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of
behavior. The abstract concept "society" means to the individual human being
the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and
to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think,
feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society-in
his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence-that it is impossible to
think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is
"society" which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work,
language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life
is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many
millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word
"society."

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society
is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished-just as in the case of ants
and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed
down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social
pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and
susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the
gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human being
which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest
themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in
scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains
how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through
his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can
play a part.

Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we
must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are
characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he
acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through
communication and through many other types of influences. It is this
cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change
and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the
individual and society. Modern anthropology has taught us, through
comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social
behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing
cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in
society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man
may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their
biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a
cruel, self-inflicted fate.

If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude
of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as
possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are
certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the
biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to
change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last
few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively
densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their
continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly-centralized
productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time-which, looking back,
seems so idyllic-is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups
could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say
that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and
consumption.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me
constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the
relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more
conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not
experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a
protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to
his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the
egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while
his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate.
All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from
this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism,
they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and
unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and
perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my
opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of
producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each
other of the fruits of their collective labor-not by force, but on the whole
in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it
is important to realize that the means of production-that is to say, the
entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as
well as additional capital goods-may legally be, and for the most part are,
the private property of individuals.

For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call
"workers" all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of
production-although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of
the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase
the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker
produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The
essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker
produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar
as the labor contract is "free," what the worker receives is determined not
by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by
the capitalists' requirements for labor power in relation to the number of
workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in
theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his
product.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of
competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological
development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of
larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of
these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of
which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized
political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are
selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by
private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate
from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the
people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the
underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing
conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly,
the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus
extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the
individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent
use of his political rights.

The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of
capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of
production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as
they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no
such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it
should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political
struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the "free
labor contract" for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the
present day economy does not differ much from "pure" capitalism.

Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that
all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find
employment; an "army of unemployed" almost always exists. The worker is
constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid
workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers'
goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological
progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of
the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with
competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the
accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe
depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to
that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned
before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our
whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive
attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship
acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely
through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an
educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an
economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are
utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production
to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among
all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman,
and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own
innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility
for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our
present society.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet
socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete
enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the
solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it
possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and
economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and
overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith
a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?

Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance
in our age of transition. Since, under present circumstances, free and
unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo, I
consider the foundation of this magazine to be an important public service.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 9:03 pm

Guest

Quote:

Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

They may be some day, but not for at least 10 or 15 years.

The post death twitching of Uncle Sam might last 10 years.

No one gives a flying fuck about AmeriKKKa. We just keep burrying you.

V-for-Vendicar

Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 1:55 am

Guest

Quote:

Yeager played no part in the shuttle program.

MMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN

"veritas" <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:

Yeah, tell him that and you won't be able to write that stupid MMMMM
stuff.

Sure. Wheel his chair over and I'll tell him personally.

Page 13 of 14 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 12, 13, 14 Next All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:19 pm Science Forum Index