E-rock

Try this: eH5-sAE9UjE Not a tele movie, but who cares, tele movies are made by a bunch of sanctimonious hippies who use bad music.

I've got some 200cm Kazama Couloirs with 3 pins and leathers. I broke them out two years ago and could barely turn for the first two runs. I forgot how much you had to angulate to get those old straight skis to arc.

Fillmore Virgin Beaver Utah

I tried to get Miss Normandy to meet me for coffee once. Bitch, gave me some bullshit about her boyfriend being reeeeeaaly jealous.

OMFG will you SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!!!!???? You take spray that fucking seriously????? Is it slanderous when I call you KocksukKojak, or do you like to suck cock?

2 in the pink 1 in the stink

As I understand, the gist of the editorial is that GORE didn't even make climate change a campaign issue. Not that Clinton wouldn't send it to congress (though he should have since he was in his second term and the weight would have been left squarely on Congress' shoulders)

NO IT DIDN'T DUMBASS. The greenhouse effect is the layman's term for the phenomenon that keeps the Earth warm and livable. The Earth's surface reflects short-wavelength (visible) light back towards space at longer wavelenghts (heat). We have an atmosphere which traps that infra-red radiation and keeps our planet comfortable. Hence, "the greenhouse effect". You learned this in grade-school. Global Warming/Climate change is a phenomenon where the Greenhouse effect, coupled with other heat producing/trapping mechanisms are caught in a dynamic feedback loop. This article says nothing about whether or not global warming is actually occuring, it merely points out the hypocrisy of one type of politician on one END of the politcal spectrum. However, it only proves how myopic and short-sighted people like you are when you start pointing fingers at LIBERALS and their LIES about the ENVIRONMENT. Capiche?

Yo dumb fuck, Male cunt, this is spray. Nothing has any relevance to anything here.

From Tuesday Morning Quarterback (the best football column in the universe) Those Hollywood Searchlights Around Gore's Home Sure Eat Power: Gore wasn't the first quack to win the Nobel Peace Prize, and history suggests he will not be the last. Gore spent eight years in the White House, and in that time took no meaningful action regarding greenhouse gases. The Clinton-Gore administration did not raise fuel economy standards for cars and trucks or propose domestic carbon trading. Though Clinton and Gore made a great show of praising the Kyoto Protocol, they refused even to submit the treaty to the Senate for consideration, let alone push for ratification. During his 2000 run for the presidency, Gore said little about climate change or binding global-warming reforms. In the White House and during his presidential campaign, Gore advocated no consequential action regarding greenhouse gases; then, there was a political cost attached. Once Gore was out of power and global-warming proposals no longer carried a political cost -- indeed, could be used for self-promotion -- suddenly Gore discovered his intense desire to demand that other leaders do what he had not! It is a triumph of postmodernism that Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize for no specific accomplishment other than making a movie of self-praise. Gore caused no peace nor led any reconciliation of belligerent parties nor performed any service to the dispossessed, the achievements the Peace Prize was created to honor. All Gore did was promote himself from Hollywood, and for this, he gets a Nobel. Very postmodern. An annoying complication of Gore's Nobel is that few realize the award was given jointly to him and to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an organization well worthy of distinction. The IPCC is a group of scientists who have spent two decades studying climate change in obscurity, and in many cases without pay. The IPCC's efforts have been selfless, motivated only by concern for society. Had the Nobel Peace Prize gone solely to the IPCC, it would have been a great day. An astonishing measure of how out-of-touch the Norwegian Nobel Committee seems is that it gave a prize to Gore for hectoring others about energy consumption in the same year it was revealed that Gore, at his home, uses 20 times the national power average. Gore's extraordinary power waste equates to about 377,000 pounds of greenhouse gases annually, or about 20 Hummer Years worth of global warming pollution. (A Hummer Year, TMQ's metric of environmental hypocrisy, is the amount of carbon dioxide emitted in a typical year of driving a Hummer.) When his utility bill made the news -- though apparently not in Oslo -- Gore responded by saying he buys carbon offsets. That takes you back to the offset problem: All offsets do is prevent greenhouse gas accumulation from increasing. If you really believe there will be a global calamity unless greenhouse gas emissions are reduced 80 percent, as Gore told the Live Earth crowd, you would buy offsets and cut your own energy use. Instead, Gore flies around in fossil-fuel-intensive jet aircraft telling others: Do as I say, not as I do! After news of Gore's personal energy consumption broke, Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider told The Associated Press the utility bill was justified because "Al and Tipper both work out of their home." This raises the question -- what kind of work are they doing? Perhaps reanimating Frankenstein; in Frankenstein movies, there is always a lot of electricity crackling wastefully about. Here are other possible reasons the Gores' home requires so much energy: • Gore is building a time machine to return to Palm Beach, Fla., in October 2000. • The former vice president is doing everything he personally can to cause global warming, so he can claim is predictions came true. • Gore is growing marijuana in his basement. [Note from the corporate legal department: This is strictly a joke, ESPN is not accusing Al Gore of growing marijuana. We stand by our allegation that he is a sinister kingpin of international rare-bird smuggling.] • Members of Gore's species require high power levels to maintain human form. • Al and Tipper don't just leave the lights on when they make out, they leave the lights on all over the house.

Catbirdseat - you are considering only the density of the continental crust and any density differential that would occur due to heating. However, the entire lithospheric rock column below Seattle includes a cold, dense oceanic slab, which, if removed, would greatly increase the bouyancy of the overlying continental crust, because it is currently thinner and hotter than average continental crust. The statement in Sci-American is b.s. for a number of reasons. 1. If not for the subducting slab in the PNW - there would BE NO FUCKING MOUNTAINS. 2. Continental crust along passive margins - i.e. where there is no active subduction - is significantly cooler, often thicker, and always MORE dense than continental crust along an active margin, like the PNW. 3. If Seattle were at 5000' of elevation, the coastline would exist significantly further to the west of its current location. Continents don't drop off abruptly. If the slab didn't exist the entire make-up of the continental margin would be different. 4. If you want to know what Seattle would be like without a subducting slab, come to New York.

Awwww, isn't it cute? They run home to send each other interweb kissy messages after date night!

Phuk yeah, porter. You're a caring individual.

Hey porter. I used to be a "Really Weird Person", now I'm just some lame-ass "pooh-bah". I earned that title, man. It was given to me by the late, great erik. I WANT IT BACK!

yo

STFU, you don't make any fucking sense. You sound like an angry little bitch.

Happend to me too, today.

I just read this important thread and have a few comments: First, even on ignore, Kevbone, Pink, and Seahawks are still fucking idiot clusters reappearing numerous times throughout a thread. Is it because the three of them are the only ones left on the site who are not ignoring each other? Second, if you believe during your youth that marriage is a bad idea based on statistics or personal experience (i.e. your parents), you will either change your mind or not later in life based on emotion, rather than ANY rational argument. Third, I have time for work, my wife, my friends and family, and very occasional climbing. How the hell do some of you have time for all of that AND kids AND spraying on CC.com?

BTW I used to spunk right on the linoleum floors. It's about time they started tearing down that piece of shit. I should have told Frank Brown what I used to do in there the last time I saw him. He probably wouldn't have been so concerned about the asbestos anymore!

HOLY FUCKING shit, if it ain't the T-MAN. I don't know how I didn't put that one together before!!! Of all the places to bump into your ass! I forgot you were a Seattleite. Give Natalie a squeeze and tell Ari I said hey!

You'll be sitting on the West Seattle bridge wishing you could ride your bike to work, Soft Cock!

At least thats what the meat producers would have us believe. Examine health data from countries that eat less meat than Americans and you'll see a different story. Shut the fuck up, hippy! Go eat some goddamn TVP and Braggs.

Guess what guys! Your traffic sucks shit because you all drive like a bunch of brake-happy pussies who don't know where you're going! Grow a pair! Yes, YOU are a part of the problem! And yes I am the agro east-coaster on your ass on the 405 tomorrow morning!

But you ALWAYS seem to be about to figure out who the sucker is, don't you?