Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-06-2014, 11:21 AM  
Cochise Cochise is offline
MVP
 
Cochise's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Casino cash: $79957560
Scientist confesses he made up polar bear population estimates

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...estimates.html



Scientist confesses he made up polar bear population estimates
Thomas Lifson
May 31, 2014

The greatest scientific fraud in history is slowly but surely unraveling, and the breadth of the corruption revealed is stunning. As any good con man knows, and emotional appeal is necessary, and the warmists found their cuddly-looking icon of endangerment in the polar bear, an animal frequently chosen as stuffed toys for children to hug. Pictures of polar bears on ice floes, presumably doomed to death by drowning as the Arctic ice disappeared, were used to tug on the heartstrings of adults and children alike, in order to scare them into willingly handing over power over their economic destiny to global mandarins who would reduce their standard of living.

But it was necessary to come up with “scientific” estimates of polar bear populations that showed them in danger. With all the billions of dollars available for global warming-related research, and the level of peer pressure that money generates, it wasn’t that difficult.


Polar bear populations became the centerpiece of the effort to fight global warming due to claims that melting polar ice caps would cause the bears to become endangered in the near future. Years ago some scientists predicted the Arctic would be virtually ice free by now.

Polar bears became the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act because they could potentially be harmed by global warming. But some recent studies have found that some polar bear subpopulations have actually flourished in recent years.


As with the hockey stick graph and many other elements of the concocted story, honest scientists working in the finest tradition of skeptical scientific inquiry, started to unravel fuzzy numbers and lies. One such hero is polar bear scientist Dr. Susan Crockford, who publishes the website Polar Bear Science. In it she documents how a scientist responsible for an alarmist lowball estimate of polar bear population is backing away from numbers that she has been questioning:

Quote:
Last week (May 22), I received an unsolicited email from Dr. Dag Vongraven, the current chairman of the IUCN [International Union for the Conservation of Nature – TL] Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG).

The email from Vongraven began this way:

“Dr. Crockford

Below you’ll find a footnote that will accompany a total polar bear population size range in the circumpolar polar bear action plan that we are currently drafting together with the Parties to the 1973 Agreement. This might keep you blogging for a day or two.”

It appears the PBSG have come to the realization that public outrage (or just confusion) is brewing over their global population estimates and some damage control is perhaps called for. Their solution — bury a statement of clarification within their next official missive (which I have commented upon here).

Instead of issuing a press release to clarify matters to the public immediately, Vongraven decided he would let me take care of informing the public that this global estimate may not be what it seems.
Wow! Burying the news in a footnote and letting a critic know instead of issuing a press release. That is certainly a signal. Here’s the news:

Here is the statement that the PBSG proposes to insert as a footnote in their forthcoming Circumpolar Polar Bear Action Plan draft:

Quote:
“As part of past status reports, the PBSG has traditionally estimated a range for the total number of polar bears in the circumpolar Arctic. Since 2005, this range has been 20-25,000. It is important to realize that this range never has been an estimate of total abundance in a scientific sense, but simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand. It is also important to note that even though we have scientifically valid estimates for a majority of the subpopulations, some are dated. Furthermore, there are no abundance estimates for the Arctic Basin, East Greenland, and the Russian subpopulations.Consequently, there is either no, or only rudimentary, knowledge to support guesses about the possible abundance of polar bears in approximately half the areas they occupy. Thus, the range given for total global population should be viewed with great caution as it cannot be used to assess population trend over the long term.”
“A guess to satisfy public demand” but wrapped in the prestige of settled science.
Posts: 41,587
Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.Cochise threw an interception on a screen pass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:34 PM   #31
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $213223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
not even sure what to call the anti-climate change crowd.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptlyon View Post
Stupid assholes


I completely agree.


EDIT: Too late, haha.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 32,995
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:35 PM   #32
AustinChief AustinChief is online now
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1702731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Obviously any non-Rain Man poll is subject to criticism.

What is of particular concern to me is that people who don't know science from Scientology are adamant that human activity can't possibly be having an impact. I really have no idea why they take that stance. Some seem to argue that it's unbelievable hubris to believe that humans can affect the world so much, while others seem to want to bury our heads in the sand because any steps we take may hurt American economic competitiveness (a position that I can at least understand).

It's amazing to me that this topic generates so much passionate hatred by...conservatives? ...not even sure what to call the anti-climate change crowd.
Those people mostly exist only on MSNBC. I have yet to meet any of these so called people.

If you change that to say there are people who believe that the human impact is insignificant then you would be more accurate.

The problem is... you have unbelievably obnoxious people on the other side of the debate. It creates a culture of conflict on the issue. The climate alarmists are reaping what they sowed on this issue.
Posts: 14,477
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:35 PM   #33
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $213223
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Sadly, this isn't completely true anymore (if ever). Recent studies have shown RAMPANT "fudging" of data in the scientific community. There was a big psych study that addressed this. I'll go find it if you want, but basically it showed an OVERWHELMING amount of "bad science" simply to support a preconceived idea. The amazing part was not just scientists pointing out how much their colleagues "cheat" but also how many admitted to it themselves.

Interesting. I'd be interested in seeing that. Certainly doesn't line up with my personal experiences, but I only know a couple of hard core science types.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 32,995
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:36 PM   #34
Fish Fish is online now
Missing Dick Curl
 
Fish's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Casino cash: $2121285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post

It's amazing to me that this topic generates so much passionate hatred by...conservatives? ...not even sure what to call the anti-climate change crowd.
Did you notice the 26% difference in concern on climate change between Republican and Democrat in the OP link? I thought that was interesting there was so much of a political split...
__________________
Posts: 25,557
Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.Fish is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:36 PM   #35
Amnorix Amnorix is offline
In BB I trust
 
Amnorix's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Boston, Mass.
Casino cash: $213223
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
The climate alarmists are reaping what they sowed on this issue.

We will all reap what the debate is sowing if it turns out that the "alarmists" are right.
__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington
Posts: 32,995
Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.Amnorix has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:44 PM   #36
AustinChief AustinChief is online now
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1702731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Interesting. I'd be interested in seeing that. Certainly doesn't line up with my personal experiences, but I only know a couple of hard core science types.
Here's a decent article that touches on the subject.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2...d-bad-practice

Quote:
he found that an average of 1.97% of scientists admitted to having "fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once – a serious form of misconduct by any standard – and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12% for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices."
Quote:
According to a report in the journal Nature, published retractions in scientific journals have increased around 1,200% over the past decade, even though the number of published papers had gone up by only 44%. Around half of these retractions are suspected cases of misconduct.
Quote:
The pressure to commit misconduct is complex. Arturo Casadevall of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York and editor in chief of the journal mBio, places a large part of the blame on the economics of science. "What is happening in recent years is that the rewards have become too high, for example, for publishing in certain journals. Just like we see the problem in sports that, if you compete and you get a reward, it translates into everything from money and endorsements and things like that. People begin to take risks because the rewards are disproportionate."
Posts: 14,477
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:47 PM   #37
ptlyon ptlyon is offline
Bono & Grbac wasn't enough
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sioux City, IA
Casino cash: $41013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
What does the Crop Science Society of America really gain from "pushing" that climate change is influenced by human factors to as significant degree? The Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics?

/snip/

Live in your little cocoon of paranoia if you like. Doesn't matter to me.
It's their desire as a scientist to be looked upon in making a difference and the notoriety that comes with it. Nobody gives a **** that they even are alive but when they cry the sky is falling on their soap box and attract national attention their ego is stroked. And yes, there is a ton of money to be made in saying so.

If you don't think so then you're in the cocoon.

This earth was never intended to live forever, it's called science.
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Advertise here: $19.99 a month
Posts: 9,701
ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:48 PM   #38
AustinChief AustinChief is online now
Administrator
 
AustinChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Austin
Casino cash: $1702731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
We will all reap what the debate is sowing if it turns out that the "alarmists" are right.
When they come back to me with a predictive model that WORKS... I'll start to listen. Until then you are dealing with random pulled out of the ass hypotheses. NOT ONE climate model has ever been predictive. That tells me that we have a lot more research to do.

Don't get me wrong... I put climate science as a TOP priority and I have no problem spending the money on it. But at this stage I want the money spent on the actual SCIENCE. Jumping ahead to drastic actions is ridiculous when the science is so ridiculously immature.
Posts: 14,477
AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.AustinChief has an IQ even higher than Frankie's.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:48 PM   #39
Garcia Bronco Garcia Bronco is offline
No Keys, No Problem
 

Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Denver
Casino cash: $78428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
Which, really, is the problem. Never in my memory has there been a greater disconnect between scientific beliefs/understanding and public beliefs. The vast, vast, VAST majority of scientists who have looked at it agree the climate change is occurring.

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

And yet somehow people want to write it all off to some kind of liberal, tree-hugging lunacy.



http://www.theguardian.com/environme...haracteristics
Like wise...if you don't believe in God then you can't be a member of the church. So what are you realy telling me?
Posts: 22,124
Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.Garcia Bronco Forgot to Remove His Claytex and Got Toxic Shock Syndrome.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 01:55 PM   #40
ptlyon ptlyon is offline
Bono & Grbac wasn't enough
 

Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sioux City, IA
Casino cash: $41013
Acid rain
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Advertise here: $19.99 a month
Posts: 9,701
ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.ptlyon is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 02:05 PM   #41
Rain Man Rain Man is offline
No known superpowers
 
Rain Man's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In A World Few See
Casino cash: $62716671
VARSITY
Setting aside the climate change discussion, I don't see the problem with the original post and footnote. I think it's pretty common to have to make a "guesstimate" for a number when you'd like to have an estimate and are working with limited data.

I did a study on mountain lion management a few years back, and was surprised to learn how little data there is on mountain lion populations. Large carniverous wildlife is very hard to do a census on, because they're generally widely dispersed and not very interested in being counted. In Colorado, some large game is regulated in hunting just by seeing how many were harvested the year before. If the number goes down, you lower the limits to help the population bounce back up, and if the number goes up then you've got more population to harvest. It's not perfect, but it's the best available information and it doesn't even attempt to make a population count.
__________________
In the final seven games of the 2013 season, the Chiefs averaged 34.6 points per game, scored 38 points or more 4 times, and went 2-5. The NFL has ruined the sport.
Posts: 76,061
Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.Rain Man is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 02:12 PM   #42
lawrenceRaider lawrenceRaider is offline
Laughing at the FUD
 
lawrenceRaider's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Arlington, TX
Casino cash: $19927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnorix View Post
I agree that there may well be room to debate to what degree HUMAN factors are causing climate change. I don't know that that is well settled.

But many seem to think either that climate change is not occurring, or that scientists aren't pretty dang sure that it is. In fact, the overwhelming majority ARE in agreement that climate change is occurring.

Which means, if nothing else, that we should be doing things like building that...thing....gate, whatever...in New York harbor or wherever, because, you know, there's like eleventy billion dollars worth of property and businesses that will be affected if the water level goes up by a couple feet. Even if you can't agree on WHY, you can agree on some "WHAT DO WE DO NOW" in terms of mitigating the effect.
It is obvious when looking at the facts that climate change is occurring, and has been for billions of years. The historical record is very clear. The focus on AGW by the Al Gores of the world is a power play, pure and simple. The science behind it is anything but settled. Al Gore and his ilk care nothing about being good stewards, they just want profit and power. With that said, why is deforestation no longer a big topic if we are truly concerned with the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere? Trees and plants are fantastic carbon recyclers/sequester units. Yet it's not even worth the electronic print to talk about whether the Amazon is getting cleared and the rate at which it gets cleared. The deserts growing should be a concern as well, and we could actually do something about both of those things with existing tech. Of course someone will be angry if we convert desert to lush vegetation as I'm sure there some lizard or tortoise that would be harmed.
Posts: 734
lawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking aboutlawrenceRaider is the dumbass Milkman is always talking about
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 02:30 PM   #43
planetdoc planetdoc is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Apr 2012
Casino cash: $25264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebolapox View Post
you've hinted that you're fairly educated. not in academia? yeah, try getting a journal article through peer-review these days. while there are certainly times when it's not rigorous enough (especially if you happen to know the right people, aka, those who are doing the reviewing OR are the editor themselves), for the most part, VERY rigorous.
I have been in academia, but I am grateful I wasnt there for long. Research, IMO, is just welfare for the educated. Too many researchers lack a salary and are living off of grants (instead of paycheck to paycheck they are grant to grant). This is the reason why most research papers end with "more research is needed." They are also under tremendous pressure to publish for their livelihood. Too much incentive to cheat the system.


Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers

Quote:
The publishers Springer and IEEE are removing more than 120 papers from their subscription services after a French researcher discovered that the works were computer-generated nonsense.

Over the past two years, computer scientist Cyril Labbé of Joseph Fourier University in Grenoble, France, has catalogued computer-generated papers that made it into more than 30 published conference proceedings between 2008 and 2013. Sixteen appeared in publications by Springer, which is headquartered in Heidelberg, Germany, and more than 100 were published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), based in New York. Both publishers, which were privately informed by Labbé, say that they are now removing the papers.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2195999

(highlights)
Quote:
One recent review of psychological science estimated that only 0.15% of published studies were attempts to directly replicate a previous finding. As a consequence, there is a proliferation of scientific findings, but little systematic effort to verify their validity, possibly leading to a proliferation of irreproducible results. Because prestigious journals do not have a strong incentive to publish replications, researchers do not have a strong incentive to conduct them.
http://centerforopenscience.org/pr/2013-10-16/
Quote:
The Reproducibility Initiative was launched by several prominent scientific journals and organizations (Science​ ​Exchange, Mendeley, PLOS, and figshare) last year in response to revelations from the pharmaceutical industry that​ ​more than 70 percent of published cancer research cannot be reproduced, thus stifling the development of effective​ ​new therapies.
Posts: 1,989
planetdoc has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 02:39 PM   #44
planetdoc planetdoc is offline
Veteran
 

Join Date: Apr 2012
Casino cash: $25264
The big problem in healthcare is research conducted by biased sources (such as pharm companies or patent holders). They are not required to publish all the studies they conduct (most importantly negative studies), and have every incentive to fudge the numbers.

The FDA, healthcare providers, and the public ultimately only find out the true efficacy of a therapy after its been in the market for a number of years and providers share data.

One would think that info would be available during clinical trials, but its not a foolproof system.
Posts: 1,989
planetdoc has disabled reputation
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-06-2014, 02:45 PM
mikey23545
This message has been deleted by mikey23545.
Old 06-06-2014, 03:07 PM   #45
GloryDayz GloryDayz is offline
Good luck KC Chiefs...
 
GloryDayz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lee's Summit, MO
Casino cash: $142045
I just looked outside and counted 4,965 Polar Bears in downtown KC.

End of global warming...
Posts: 21,078
GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.GloryDayz is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.