Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

About That Global Warming...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • About That Global Warming...

    One of the things all the so called global warming research has in common is a lack of the sun.

    That's true... no one studying AGW factored in the sun in their projections of run-a-way global warming.

    And now, what is the sun doing?

    Nothing... or next to it...

    The sun has gone quietsolar cycle 24 continues to rank as one of the weakest cycles more than a century
    Which means...

    'If history is a guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a negative impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom-most layer of Earths atmosphere - and where we all live.'
    Even the sun is against AGW

    And the outlook?

    Consequences of a weak solar cycle First, the weak solar cycle has resulted in rather benign space weather in recent times with generally weaker-than-normal geomagnetic storms. By all Earth-based measures of geomagnetic and geoeffective solar activity, this cycle has been extremely quiet. However, there is some evidence that most large events such as strong solar flares and significant geomagnetic storms tend to occur in the declining phase of the solar cycle. In other words, there is still a chance for significant solar activity in the months and years ahead.

    Second, it is pretty well understood that solar activity has a direct impact on temperatures at very high altitudes in a part of the Earths atmosphere called the thermosphere. This is the biggest layer of the Earths atmosphere which lies directly above the mesosphere and below the exosphere. Thermospheric temperatures increase with altitude due to absorption of highly energetic solar radiation and are highly dependent on solar activity.

    Finally, if history is a guide, it is safe to say that weak solar activity for a prolonged period of time can have a negative impact on global temperatures in the troposphere which is the bottom-most layer of Earths atmosphere and where we all live. There have been two notable historical periods with decades-long episodes of low solar activity. The first period is known as the Maunder Minimum, named after the solar astronomer Edward Maunder, and it lasted from around 1645 to 1715. The second one is referred to as the Dalton Minimum, named for the English meteorologist John Dalton, and it lasted from about 1790 to 1830. Both of these historical periods coincided with below-normal global temperatures in an era now referred to by many as the Little Ice Age. In addition, research studies in just the past couple of decades have found a complicated relationship between solar activity, cosmic rays, and clouds on Earth. This research suggests that in times of low solar activity where solar winds are typically weak; more cosmic rays reach the Earths atmosphere which, in turn, has been found to lead to an increase in certain types of clouds that can act to cool the Earth.

    Outlook The increasingly likely outcome for an historically weak solar cycle continues the recent downward trend in sunspot cycle strength that began over twenty years ago during solar cycle 22. If this trend continues for the next couple of cycles, then there would likely be more talk of another grand minimum for the sun. Some solar scientists are already predicting that the next solar cycle, #25, will be even weaker than this current one. However, it is just too early for high confidence in these predictions since some solar scientists believe that the best predictor of future solar cycle strength involves activity at the suns poles during a solar minimum and the next solar minimum is still likely several years away.
    And yet the left still wants us to 'fight' AGW...

    But why?

    Because it was never about 'global warming' Never ever... it was all about global control by the far left... that's why they can't back down... when so clearly they were and are wrong.

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/07/...han-a-century/

  • #2
    Re: About That Global Warming...

    Originally posted by tsquare View Post
    One of the things all the so called global warming research has in common is a lack of the sun.

    That's true... no one studying AGW factored in the sun in their projections of run-a-way global warming.

    And now, what is the sun doing?

    Nothing... or next to it...



    Which means...



    Even the sun is against AGW

    And the outlook?



    And yet the left still wants us to 'fight' AGW...

    But why?

    Because it was never about 'global warming' Never ever... it was all about global control by the far left... that's why they can't back down... when so clearly they were and are wrong.

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/07/...han-a-century/
    Are you joking? Are you saying that tens of thousands of scientists didn't look at the Sun? How stupid do you think we are?


    Anyway, here is your answer...
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...al-warming.htm

    I think this post show how deluded the deniers are? Think is the level of intellect that they have on this subject...

    ?


    • #3
      Re: About That Global Warming...

      Originally posted by CowboyTed View Post
      Are you joking? Are you saying that tens of thousands of scientists didn't look at the Sun? How stupid do you think we are?
      How stupid do you think we are?

      You give us a site with 14 year old data on it... conveniently NOT showing the 17 year halt in warming...

      Why?

      Because you know that Mann and the rest have been completely debunked because:

      None of them predicted the halt in temp rise...

      And none of them factored in the sun... one way or the other.


      Show me where Mann included the sun in his 'hockey stick' calculations... Show me where AlGore factored in the sun in his predictions.
      Last edited by Sluggo; 07-18-2014, 11:34 AM. Reason: deleted the double post

      ?


      • #4
        Re: About That Global Warming...

        Yep scientists around the world just completely ignored the largest source of heat in the solar system.

        That's the weakest theory I've ever heard against climate change and I've heard some pretty weak arguments.
        Do you guys think scientists are geeks who live in their bedrooms and never see the sun so didn't consider it.

        ?


        • #5
          Re: About That Global Warming...

          As much as I am not a climate alarmist nor do I support them, I find it hard to believe that science ignored the impact of the sun.

          ?


          • #6
            Re: About That Global Warming...

            Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
            Yep scientists around the world just completely ignored the largest source of heat in the solar system.

            That's the weakest theory I've ever heard against climate change and I've heard some pretty weak arguments.
            Do you guys think scientists are geeks who live in their bedrooms and never see the sun so didn't consider it.
            The one's you guys follow? Maybe...

            It is well established that they did in fact ignore the sun for the purposes of their climate models. Why? Because with the sun entering into a new low cycle it didn't help their cause to 'prove' AGW.

            They could not have gotten their results showing increasing, unrelenting increased warming if they had factored in the sun.

            Now I'm asking both you and CowboyTed to prove me wrong by proving that Mann et el did include the sun into their models. I know that you can't... you don't even know why you can't.

            ?


            • #7
              Re: About That Global Warming...

              Originally posted by tsquare View Post
              How stupid do you think we are?

              You give us a site with 14 year old data on it... conveniently NOT showing the 17 year halt in warming...

              Why?

              Because you know that Mann and the rest have been completely debunked because:

              None of them predicted the halt in temp rise...

              And none of them factored in the sun... one way or the other.


              Show me where Mann included the sun in his 'hockey stick' calculations... Show me where AlGore factored in the sun in his predictions.
              Here ya' go:
              Camp and Tung explore the ramifications further in a follow-up paper Solar-Cycle Warming at the Earth’s Surface and an Observational Determination of Climate Sensitivity.
              http://www.skepticalscience.com/sola...al-warming.htm

              There's a couple of links there. OTOH, they might all be members of the People's Vanguard for Destruction of Capitalism While Selling Lotsa Solar Panels. I'm sure things will be sorted out in the next 20 years. If your side is wrong, will you admit it?

              ?


              • #8
                Re: About That Global Warming...

                Variations in the solar cycle would neither prove nor disprove AGW alone. If there is a decline in solar activity and the earh isn't cooling as fast as the decline would suggest I'd warrant that's an argument in favor of AGW.

                ?


                • #9
                  Re: About That Global Warming...

                  Originally posted by radcentr View Post
                  Here ya' go:
                  That is the same 14 year old crap CowboyTed tried to sell me.

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Re: About That Global Warming...

                    Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
                    Variations in the solar cycle would neither prove nor disprove AGW alone. If there is a decline in solar activity and the earh isn't cooling as fast as the decline would suggest I'd warrant that's an argument in favor of AGW.
                    I see your point... and it would make a good argument for AGW.

                    Except for...

                    - Do we know 'enough' to be able to say that 'this' level of decline in solar activity should result in say... a 2 degree drop... and yet it didn't?

                    - Do we know 'enough' to know that some natural mechanism isn't making up the difference?

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Re: About That Global Warming...

                      Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                      I see your point... and it would make a good argument for AGW.

                      Except for...

                      - Do we know 'enough' to be able to say that 'this' level of decline in solar activity should result in say... a 2 degree drop... and yet it didn't?

                      - Do we know 'enough' to know that some natural mechanism isn't making up the difference?
                      I think it is a scientific fact that our star is warming up. I don't know if this has anything to do with the solar cycle that gives us sunspots and solar storms. But a warming sun, would necessarily warm up the earth. Perhaps our sun cycles on warming and cooling, but I think the long view is it uses up its fuel and cools, turning into a red sun at some point before its end.

                      So the reason for global warming very well may involved at least 3 variables. A warming sun, deforestation, and co2 levels rising from the interplay of fossil fuel burning and loss of flora.

                      Theoretically, if we had the knowledge, we could have offset co2 levels from rising by the addition of carbon eating flora. Some intake more co2 than others. This would be atmospheric management. And using this scientific principle, we could now begin to pull down co2 levels for worldwide land management, planting flora, stopping the destruction of rain forests. But you cannot make the same level of profit for a few if you go this route. So, how can I take these people seriously? They got another agenda, IMO.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Re: About That Global Warming...

                        Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                        That is the same 14 year old crap CowboyTed tried to sell me.
                        It compares two different solar cycles, one ending 2001, the other ending 2007. You didn't read the article (which is not the same as Ted's link), and you didn't properly count the years.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Re: About That Global Warming...

                          The sun variies in luminosity and is gradually getting brighter and will over the next couple billion years pump out more energy each year on average but the overall change while signifigant is tiny compared to minor variations over the short term which would cause more obvious tempreature changes.

                          The good thing about sun based measuremnts is it's right there and producing energyy (data) all the time so variations can be noted.

                          For the record I'm not a warmist or a denier as the data has traditionally shown warming, just not so much we need to cripple our economy or pay for our climates sins with indulgences. The time frames for the worse of the scenarios is still realistically centuries off of full realization, we're clever monkeys, we can adapt.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            So far this winter, Arctic Sea ice levels are above where they were at the same time last winter and are well within the the standard deviation of the 1981 to 2010 variation,according to daily sea ice data.

                            http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/05/ar...ore-predicted/

                            ?


                            • #15
                              So you guys think scientists with decades of experience in the field who supply the reports and research about climate change just forgot about that massive shiny thing in the sky?

                              Do you seriously think they're all geeks who sit inside all day at the computer so maybe they just forgot the sun exists?

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X