Global Climate Change Science News

Post Reply
User avatar
Rum
Absent Minded Processor
Posts: 37030
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:25 pm
Location: South of the border..though not down Mexico way..
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Rum » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:19 pm

This functionally illiterate mentally emasculated dunderhead knows poo when he sees it.

User avatar
Galaxian
Posts: 569
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:11 pm
About me: Too old & too far away from the beloved...
Location: Koreye-koor
Contact:

Re: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Post by Galaxian » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:29 pm

Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:49 pm
Galaxian wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:12 am
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165
Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming
Flawed Reasoning: The authors' argument claims a correlation between cloud cover/relative humidity and global temperature proves that the former caused the latter without investigating whether they have the relationship backwards.
Inadequate support: The source of their claimed global cloud dataset is not given, and no research on their proposed mechanism for climate change is cited.
Fails to provide correct physical explanation: The manuscript incorrectly claims that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide is caused by release from ocean waters. It also provides no explanation for the claim that an increase in relative humidity causes global cooling.
Details here.
:clap: Well done! you managed to dredge up a denial from a stakeholder figure with his grants & reputation on the line! Never mind that the thesis from the team of scientists at Turku University in Finland (not a blogger) was also published by Cornell University. Good try at ambiguation (muddying the waters). Would have expected better from a 'rational atheist'. :clap:
Here's a clear exposition of the orbital dynamic causes of climate change... Do try to understand it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztninkgZ0ws
:coffee:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment._Sam Nejad
There's no Mercy. There's no Justice. There is only Natural Selection! _Galaxian
The more important a news item, the more likely that it's a hidden agenda disinformation_Galaxian
There is a saying attributed to President Lincoln, that the law may declare a steer to be a cow but it can't make him give milk._Matt Giwer

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20638
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Post by Hermit » Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:53 pm

Galaxian wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:29 pm
Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:49 pm
Galaxian wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:12 am
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165
Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming
Flawed Reasoning: The authors' argument claims a correlation between cloud cover/relative humidity and global temperature proves that the former caused the latter without investigating whether they have the relationship backwards.
Inadequate support: The source of their claimed global cloud dataset is not given, and no research on their proposed mechanism for climate change is cited.
Fails to provide correct physical explanation: The manuscript incorrectly claims that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide is caused by release from ocean waters. It also provides no explanation for the claim that an increase in relative humidity causes global cooling.
Details here.
:clap: Well done!
Thanks, and I agree for the following reasons: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming because
1) The authors' argument claims a correlation between cloud cover/relative humidity and global temperature proves that the former caused the latter without investigating whether they have the relationship backwards.
2) The source of their claimed global cloud dataset is not given, and no research on their proposed mechanism for climate change is cited.
3) The manuscript incorrectly claims that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide is caused by release from ocean waters. It also provides no explanation for the claim that an increase in relative humidity causes global cooling.

None of which you have even attempted to address. Handwaving doesn't count, you know?

User avatar
Galaxian
Posts: 569
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:11 pm
About me: Too old & too far away from the beloved...
Location: Koreye-koor
Contact:

Re: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Post by Galaxian » Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:45 pm

Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:53 pm
Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:49 pm
Details here.
Thanks, and I agree for the following reasons: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming because
1) The authors' argument claims a correlation between cloud cover/relative humidity and global temperature proves that the former caused the latter without investigating whether they have the relationship backwards.
2) The source of their claimed global cloud dataset is not given, and no research on their proposed mechanism for climate change is cited.
3) The manuscript incorrectly claims that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide is caused by release from ocean waters. It also provides no explanation for the claim that an increase in relative humidity causes global cooling.
None of which you have even attempted to address. Handwaving doesn't count, you know?
You quote an article, from a partisan site "Climate Feedback", that actually lies by omission: It claims that the thesis is merely by three authors and includes Paul Joseph Watson among them!. The provenance of the actual authors; J. Kaupinnen & P. Malmi, is not given; that they're from the Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, Finland. You imitate them by crediting Galaxian with saying "Thank You!" with none of the additional clauses that modified my statement...That is, you cherry picked from an entire paragraph, just as your climate propagandists did.

But let me answer your questions, that you pretend Galaxian is not aware of:
1) The authors state that the IPCC reports greatly exaggerate the anthropogenic contribution to global warming; to the extent that the IPCC claim becomes irrelevant. That is; the anthropogenic contribution is not significant. They certainly DID investigate the relationship & gave copious references to it. Do try to read the references at the end of the thesis, as the Climate Feedback people should have done had they been honest.

2) The source is most certainly given. It is from the NOAA satellite data https://www.noaa.gov/satellites , as well as the IPCC data itself, as well as meteorological records of western countries. References given:
[1] T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, L.V. Alexander, S.K. Allen, N.L. Bindoff, F.-M. Breon, J.A. Church, U. Cubasch, S. Emori, P. Forster, P. Friedlingstein, N. Gillett, J.M. Gregory, D.L. Hartmann, E. Jansen, B. Kirtman, R. Knutti, K. Krishna Kumar, P. Lemke, J. Marotzke, V. Masson-Delmotte, G.A. Meehl, I.I. Mokhov, S. Piao, V. Ramaswamy, D. Randall, M. Rhein, M. Rojas, C. Sabine, D. Shindell, L.D. Talley, D.G. Vaughan, and S.-P. Xie. Technical Sum- mary, book section TS, page 33115. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2013.

3) Lastly, you query a point already answered. I covered that topic here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=52643&start=2055#p1832987 and here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=52643&start=2070#p1833002
The excuse used by climate fashionistas was first to deny that CO2 rises after the warming, and then to back pedal and say it must be because the oceans release it as their water warms up.
But they've shot themselves in the foot! Because if CO2 is a major greenhouse contributor, then there would be a runaway effect: CO2 rise -> ocean warming -> more CO2 released -> more ocean warming -> more CO2 released -> more ocean warming, etc, etc.

But that does not happen, because atmospheric water vapor is some 100 times more influential as a greenhouse gas than CO2... it's basic atmospheric physics... Look it up some day, or some year, or some decade...if you live that long, or dementia doesn't overtake you first. So, are you REALLY looking for the truth, or are you another SJW with an agenda? :coffee:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment._Sam Nejad
There's no Mercy. There's no Justice. There is only Natural Selection! _Galaxian
The more important a news item, the more likely that it's a hidden agenda disinformation_Galaxian
There is a saying attributed to President Lincoln, that the law may declare a steer to be a cow but it can't make him give milk._Matt Giwer

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20638
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Hermit » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:09 pm

O Glaxative, the non-peer reviewed article you so value provides a grand total of six (6) references. Four (4) of them refer to articles authored by the same people who wrote this one, and one (1) of those four is yet to be published, presumably in yet another journal that does not bother about peer reviews. Furthermore, none of the six (6) references bother with providing a page number where support for assertions in the article are allegedly located.

I admire your derring-do in basing your argument - if it can be called an argument - on such flimsy grounds, but I will not join you there, nor will I bother responding to further comments regarding this particular castle in the sky until you have anchored it on a solid foundation. Thanks for playing just the same.

User avatar
Joe
Posts: 1843
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:10 am
Location: The Hovel under the Mountain
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Joe » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:42 pm

Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:09 pm
O Glaxative, the non-peer reviewed article you so value provides a grand total of six (6) references. Four (4) of them refer to articles authored by the same people who wrote this one, and one (1) of those four is yet to be published, presumably in yet another journal that does not bother about peer reviews. Furthermore, none of the six (6) references bother with providing a page number where support for assertions in the article are allegedly located.

I admire your derring-do in basing your argument - if it can be called an argument - on such flimsy grounds, but I will not join you there, nor will I bother responding to further comments regarding this particular castle in the sky until you have anchored it on a solid foundation. Thanks for playing just the same.
Plus his video doesn't support his argument. Here's the summation at 10:36.
Because of this, climate models predict that we have another 25,000 to 50,000 years of inter-glacial period left. And that's only if you ignore anthropogenic climate change.

Human influence on the climate messes with with the whole equation. With CO2 now at 400 parts per million, it's higher than at any time in the quaternary period. It's been predicted that this may extend the current inter-glacial for 100,000 years. So we've probably, at least, offset the next glaciation, although it wasn't coming anytime soon anyway. The real question is: have we ended the entire quaternary ice age?

Also possible, however, the recent increase in greenhouse gasses is so large and so sudden that there's no precedent anywhere in the climate record. This makes modelling our influence a huge challenge. But don't mistake that for a lack of certainty. Our influence is certainly enormous. There's another climate extreme that's much less fun than a long mild inter-glacial. That's a sweltering greenhouse climate, like the one that dominated the Mesozoic when the dinosaurs roamed, or you know, Venus.

See you next week.
I wonder if Galaxian is a dinosaur. :smoke:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"as far as strong, i am hard as a rock and tough as a nail. no one will bring me down. no one. i am the debonator. the tnt. and jesus has my back door pal!" - D. C. Bockemehl
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake

User avatar
Galaxian
Posts: 569
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:11 pm
About me: Too old & too far away from the beloved...
Location: Koreye-koor
Contact:

Bogus anthropogenic warming increasingly seen as a hoax

Post by Galaxian » Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:48 pm

Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:09 pm
O Glaxative, the non-peer reviewed article you so value provides a grand total of six (6) references. Four (4) of them refer to articles authored by the same people who wrote this one, and one (1) of those four is yet to be published, presumably in yet another journal that does not bother about peer reviews. Furthermore, none of the six (6) references bother with providing a page number where support for assertions in the article are allegedly located.
I admire your derring-do in basing your argument - if it can be called an argument - on such flimsy grounds, but I will not join you there, nor will I bother responding to further comments regarding this particular castle in the sky until you have anchored it on a solid foundation. Thanks for playing just the same.
I sincerely hope that is a promise, since you're evidently another person who does no research but expects your adversary to do it. Then you continue with your defiance, based solely on what is PC, since you can not create a rational discourse of your own.
I doubt that the members have looked at the above video about the orbital mechanics contributions to climate change (apart from Joe, who thinks that I may have been its co-author... Hey Joe, that video was about orbital mechanics, if you missed that part :snooze: ) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztninkgZ0ws Nevertheless, here's another one, this time about the solar energy output contribution. This is by Prof. V. Zharkova of Northumbria University, England. I dare you to read it:
http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/30755/1/J_Atmos.pdf

Here's the easy form video version. (And for Joe...Galaxian had no hand in its production) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NI1bQe8I4A


But don't worry. If the heat or cold or famine or war or pestilence doesn't kill you, the AI will...Just 16 years to go :dance: :tut: :yayay:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment._Sam Nejad
There's no Mercy. There's no Justice. There is only Natural Selection! _Galaxian
The more important a news item, the more likely that it's a hidden agenda disinformation_Galaxian
There is a saying attributed to President Lincoln, that the law may declare a steer to be a cow but it can't make him give milk._Matt Giwer

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 24146
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:05 pm

Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:49 pm
Galaxian wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:12 am
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165
Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Flawed Reasoning: The authors' argument claims a correlation between cloud cover/relative humidity and global temperature proves that the former caused the latter without investigating whether they have the relationship backwards.

Inadequate support: The source of their claimed global cloud dataset is not given, and no research on their proposed mechanism for climate change is cited.

Fails to provide correct physical explanation: The manuscript incorrectly claims that the rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide is caused by release from ocean waters. It also provides no explanation for the claim that an increase in relative humidity causes global cooling.
Details here.
Science deniers cannot accept that the peer review process of science-at-large acts to dampens down possible research biases because bias is the currency of science denial, particularly when it comes to environmental science. We see it here to the extent that a denier, knowing that they must present some factual basis for their objective claims, is attempting to discredit science-at-large with science which is simultaneously held to a lower standard than science-at-large while being elevated to be more scientifically significant or important than any other science.

I would suggest that even if the fundamental conclusions of current climate science changed in response to new data over the next 10 years to show that humans have absolutely no impact on the global environment the problems of global warming would still exist and the debate would continue about the best way to deal with that. The fact remains that the climate is warming and that this will have unavoidable consequences for humans regardless of or aside from the reasons for that warming. Discrediting the science does not change this fact but what environmental science does offer is a sound basis for future action. The science deniers scepticism has simply been co-opted by those powerful political and economic entities who see that changing the way we respond to global warming--which is bassically changing the way we organise our society and live our lives--is bad for business. The science denier is the stooge of corporate Capitalism, and whether they know it or not they are foot soldiers on the side of intransigent greed in its ongoing war against humanity.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20638
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: Non-peer-reviewed manuscript falsely claims natural cloud changes can explain global warming

Post by Hermit » Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:25 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:05 pm
The science denier is the stooge of corporate Capitalism, and whether they know it or not they are foot soldiers on the side of intransigent greed in its ongoing war against humanity.
You hit the nail on the head right there.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 24146
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Jul 13, 2019 6:29 pm

✊
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
Posts: 38393
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Animavore » Sat Jul 13, 2019 7:11 pm

The continuous accumulation of carbon dioxide in the planet's oceans—which shows no sign of stopping due to humanity's relentless consumption of fossil fuels—is likely to trigger a chemical reaction in Earth's carbon cycle similar to those which happened just before mass extinction events, according to a new study.

MIT geophysics professor Daniel Rothman released new data on Monday showing that carbon levels today could be fast approaching a tipping point threshold that could trigger extreme ocean acidificationsimilar to the kind that contributed to the Permian–Triassic mass extinction that occurred about 250 million years ago. 

Rothman's new research comes two years after he predicted that a mass extinction event could take place at the end of this century. Since 2017, he has been working to understand how life on Earth might be wiped out due to increased carbon in the oceans.

Rothman created a model in which he simulated adding carbon dioxide to oceans, finding that when the gas was added to an already-stable marine environment, only temporary acidification occurred.

When he continuously pumped carbon into the oceans, however, as humans have been doing at greater and greater levels since the late 18th century, the ocean model eventually reached a threshold which triggered what MIT called "a cascade of chemical feedbacks," or "excitation," causing extreme acidification and worsening the warming effects of the originally-added carbon.

Over the past 540 million years, these chemical feedbacks have occurred at various times, Rothman noted.

But the most significant occurances took place around the time of four out of the five mass extinction events—and today's oceans are absorbing carbon far more quickly than they did before the Permian–Triassic extinction, in which 90 percent of life on Earth died out.

The planet may now be "at the precipice of excitation," Rothman told 
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/ ... DjPI0yvuoA
"[Donald Trump] a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose".
- New Zealand mosque shooter.

User avatar
Animavore
Nasty Hombre
Posts: 38393
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:26 am
Location: Ire Land.
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Animavore » Sat Jul 13, 2019 8:00 pm

Disappearing sea ice is changing the whole ecosystem of the Arctic Ocean

I drafted this while looking north over the frozen Lincoln Sea, at the northernmost tip of Ellesmere Island in Canada. I was at Alert, a Canadian Forces Station which, at 82°N, is the most northerly permanently inhabited place on Earth. Just 815km away, across the Arctic Ocean, lay the North Pole.

It was May, and the sea should have still been frozen, but this year the bridge of sea ice between Ellesmere and Greenland broke up early, and Arctic ice began flowing down the narrow Nares Channel and south into Baffin Bay. All across the Arctic Ocean, the amount and persistence of sea ice is declining – September ice cover has fallen around 30% since 1980.

The Arctic is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the planet, and images of polar bears on small ice floes capture the imagination. But those images represent (excusing the pun) only the tip of the iceberg – the consequences of ice loss are profound and start from the very bottom of the food chain, in the microbial processes that drive the biology of the ocean.
https://theconversation.com/disappearin ... ean-117433
"[Donald Trump] a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose".
- New Zealand mosque shooter.

User avatar
Joe
Posts: 1843
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:10 am
Location: The Hovel under the Mountain
Contact:

Re: Bogus anthropogenic warming increasingly seen as a hoax

Post by Joe » Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:58 pm

Galaxian wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:48 pm
Hermit wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:09 pm
O Glaxative, the non-peer reviewed article you so value provides a grand total of six (6) references. Four (4) of them refer to articles authored by the same people who wrote this one, and one (1) of those four is yet to be published, presumably in yet another journal that does not bother about peer reviews. Furthermore, none of the six (6) references bother with providing a page number where support for assertions in the article are allegedly located.
I admire your derring-do in basing your argument - if it can be called an argument - on such flimsy grounds, but I will not join you there, nor will I bother responding to further comments regarding this particular castle in the sky until you have anchored it on a solid foundation. Thanks for playing just the same.
I sincerely hope that is a promise, since you're evidently another person who does no research but expects your adversary to do it. Then you continue with your defiance, based solely on what is PC, since you can not create a rational discourse of your own.
I doubt that the members have looked at the above video about the orbital mechanics contributions to climate change (apart from Joe, who thinks that I may have been its co-author... Hey Joe, that video was about orbital mechanics, if you missed that part :snooze: ) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztninkgZ0ws Nevertheless, here's another one, this time about the solar energy output contribution. This is by Prof. V. Zharkova of Northumbria University, England. I dare you to read it:
http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/30755/1/J_Atmos.pdf

Here's the easy form video version. (And for Joe...Galaxian had no hand in its production) :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NI1bQe8I4A


But don't worry. If the heat or cold or famine or war or pestilence doesn't kill you, the AI will...Just 16 years to go :dance: :tut: :yayay:
Now now Starbuck, lying about what you said doesn't help your argument, but I can see how me refuting it with your own source might distract you. You've forgotten your own assertion
Galaxian wrote:Here's a clear exposition of the orbital dynamic causes of climate change... Do try to understand it
Well, I read it, understood it, and quoted the part that illustrates its insufficiency. Your attempt to change the subject only demonstrates your lack of a cogent counterargument. Since you're evidently another person who does no research but expects your adversary to do it, you can either quote the part of Zharkova's paper that supports your thesis, or be dismissed.

Hermit's right. Until you can do better than a solar physicist's model for sunspot prediction to support your claims, your argument isn't worth further response. :bored:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
"as far as strong, i am hard as a rock and tough as a nail. no one will bring me down. no one. i am the debonator. the tnt. and jesus has my back door pal!" - D. C. Bockemehl
"If you vote for idiots, idiots will run the country." - Dr. Kori Schake

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 62011
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by JimC » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:13 am

I suspect that Galaxian, and other deluded deniers, view "peer reviewed science" as a conspiracy to promote some sort of rigid establishment science cartel, and the alternative whacky non-peer-reviewed voices as brave revolutionaries struggling to reveal the truth being suppressed by the mainstream... :roll:

This viewpoint typically happens with people with a poor or non-existent science education. :tea:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20638
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: Global Climate Change Science News

Post by Hermit » Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:33 am

JimC wrote:
Sun Jul 14, 2019 3:13 am
I suspect that Galaxian, and other deluded deniers, view "peer reviewed science" as a conspiracy to promote some sort of rigid establishment science cartel, and the alternative whacky non-peer-reviewed voices as brave revolutionaries struggling to reveal the truth being suppressed by the mainstream... :roll:

This viewpoint typically happens with people with a poor or non-existent science education. :tea:
Or, to put it in other words,

Image

which is quite funny, considering Glaxative is seriously presenting it to us. Not his funniest shit, though. There are many more arrows to his quiver. His end of the world in 16 years prophesy, for example, is funnier, and that in turn is topped by his claims regarding his interplanetary travels.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests