Nice...that's awesome.
Reminds me of the old school movie Wages of Fear, where they drove trucks full of nitro glycerin through the jungle to blow up a well fire (the old way of putting them out). That's a pretty extreme fire extinguisher too!

Very funny. Its always "scientists" who bring that up and who first brought that up. Do you even read those reports? Scientists and their studies (more like very flawed simulations) are always quoted. First they said (Mojib Latif and others) that there wont be any hard winters anymore due to AGW. After it became evident that those utterings were utter bullshit, they said that hard winters will be very often due to AGW (PIK and others) and after we got a normal winter again, they said that this is typical for AGW too (PIK and others again).
If it wasnt for them, this hype wouldnt be nearly where it is.

They just say what is convenient and what fits into their agenda. Its all about money and personal security. Nothing more nothing less, they just think its something different due to their indoctrination. AGW has become a huge self-sustaining (thanks to those corrupt "scientists") economic booster where insurances, scientists, politicians and many many companies (even oil companies - yes, check the global warming lobby) and their lobbies are benefiting from. Its simply not possible to talk about it objectively anymore. And if you try, people like you will come up and defend it like a religion, and prove this fact very quickly. Just look at "bio" fuels. Its a HUGE part of economy already, but it simply isnt eco-friendly at all. Instead people are starving because mono cultures are used instead of different plants for food, so much water is used for producing bio fuels that people have to suffer. The rain forest and others are cleared to be able to put more mono cultures up. Companies like Monsanto are becoming more and more powerful because of it and studies that bio fuels are bad for lots of engines are being censored or simply not funded since even car manufacturers profit from it when engines blow up sooner.

More extreme weather? Bullshit aswell. Thats simply not true, as quite a few (ignored by the "consensus") studies have shown. Its just the reports about even the tiniest things that have bloated up in the globalized and interconnected world of today and untold truths that are fooling you and of course the agendas that need to be kept upright with even the tiniest happenings that fit into it. Next time when you see a report, ask yourself if something like that would have been mentioned globally 20 or 30 years ago.

Take the flood in Pakistan for example. Oh, it was soooo bad and soooo AGW caused, oh the horror, we will all see the same thing and worse in our own countries if we continue to sin in the face of our go-- err scientists!
No, it wasnt. It was as normal as all the very common floods there before. It just wasnt mentioned that since the 70s Pakistans population has tripled and the vast majority of those people have settled down on the fertile lands around the (straightened!!!) rivers.

If that wasnt enough, people like you even completely ignore the fact, even if all their claims were true, that warm periods were ALWAYS much much better for this planet and its inhabitants than cold ones and colder ones than we have right now (we live in an ice age after all) were always bad, if not catastrophic.

And because of that fact I wont be that stupid and waste my time here with more replies, since you guys have made it very obvious already where you are coming from.

Just one little thing to think about for you guys (yeah I still have hope, though its prolly not very realistic), since the rest of my posts will get marginalized by your ignorance anyway:
Just because most scientists are pro-AGW doesnt prove crap. It was always only very few if not only a single scientist who tried to prove many other scientists wrong in their assumptions and most scientists were wrong and very arrogant, especially if they formed something like a society. But like before, there are thankfully still a few of them left who treat science as science and not as their religion or extension of their ego.

he haw. Not surprised he had a blow up doll.

first the blow up..
then the DROOOOOOP..
everybody BOUNCE!
*promote

1 more comment have been lost in the ether at this killed duplicate.

I see you like Frank Turner, because you clearly have good taste in music. He's really blowing up lately, it's awesome. I got into him a few years ago because of one of my college buddies who showed me a few of his songs from Love Ire & Song and Poetry of the Deed, and the dude's easily one of my favorite artists these days.

Anyway, with all the festivals he's going to be playing this year, I figured toss some more of him up on the Sift so a few more people can hopefully find and enjoy him, y'know?

http://videosift.com/video/Frank-Turner-Recovery

I'll toss my next power point at trying to get one of those other vids up over 10 votes, they're all so close.

Let's ignore the anti-obama trolls here. lantern and thorns don't give a shit about drone strikes and are really only annoyed because it's not a republican president ordering them.

@VoodooV, I'm afraid I can't agree with your analogy either. If there's a guy with his finger on the button of nuclear missile about to blow up LA, then by all means drone strike his ass. That's extraordinary circumstances.

My problem is that these are not extraordinary circumstances. It has become routine. The USA (and let's not pretend it's just Obama) has legitimised assassination, because they can.

It turns out that drones are an incredibly effective tool of killing with zero risk to soldiers. Bad guys dead, good guys home in time for dinner... political win all round!

And right now, the USA has pretty much a monopoly on the whole drone technology thing. But that's not going to last, and short of repeating the hypocrisy of nuclear weapons ("no nukes for you! only WE get nukes!"), in 10-15 years time, everyone who wants one has drones.

So at that point, what's to stop whatever country from drone striking whoever they feel like? After all, we've accepted that assassination is a valid political tool now. It probably always was, but now we're open about it, which makes it a lot harder to decry.

In theory, I guess you could accuse me of employing the slippery slope fallacy, but I don't think I'm extrapolating by much. The technology is simple and available, and the legal barriers are being removed. It's just a question of how widespread it becomes.

SFOGuys' gottit-That's why the extra space at the balloon never changes-I used to do this but just compress the thing into my mouth as the other end took up the slack-Sometimes it would POP!

Another cool trick I used to do when I sold balloons(I can blow up one of these and tie it off in under five seconds) was to blow one up for a kid begging me for a free one then break it in half holding the air in both sides then offer it, and let it go when they went to grab it-The two ends go sailing-off in random directions with a "Whheeeeeeeeent!"..kids would either be devastated or ask me to do it again and again

As always with Gav and Dan ... that blowed up real good! *promote

The budget of any commercial could conceivably be converted into food for the hungry; it's meaningless to single any one out whether it uses food or not.

In any case we don't want to feed the hungry. Feed the hungry and you just get twice as many hungry next generation. Real humanitarians, real environmentalists, support radical population reduction. Then there's more land, more oil, more oxygen for everyone; and we can blow up anything we want, hooray.

I draw the line at blowing up food.