The Climate Pool: Boos & Queues: A seven-hour saga getting into the conference | Facebook — Come on. This is hilarious, no?
Seth’s toes are finally warm. In his security photo he is grinning like a child — and with reason. He’s finally in.
“You have no idea how important water and a bathroom is until you don’t have it,” he said after waiting 7 hours and 20 minutes to enter the Copenhagen climate talks.
With U.N. security letting in only those cleared last week, hundreds of accredited delegates, journalists and NGO representatives were left to stand for hours in near-freezing temperatures before being let through. “It was crazy,” AP’s Seth Borenstein said. “You couldn’t leave the line. You couldn’t go to the bathroom, you couldn’t eat. Then snowflakes started falling. One woman even said, ‘if lightning strikes me, would they take me out of line?’”
People started handing out food — one gave out tangerines, another croissants. A man screamed “I don’t need food. I need socks! I’m freezing my ass off out here.” At one point, a U.N. official announced the wait would be longer, prompting the crowd to boo and chant “Let Us In!”
From: Obamaforever
To: Johnny per #20
The problem, Johnny, is because of your past posts we do not know if you are being funny or stupid!!!!!!!!!!
You can buy tablets to supplement irony deficiency I believe.
#21 Obamaforever
Luckily we don’t have the same problem with your posts
Hey Obamaforever,
I don’t even know you, but up yours!
*farting to add some more CO2*
From: Obamaforever
To: honeyman
What was not Smoker?
From: Obamaforever
To: Jopa
per #24
Jopa, don’t fart too hard or too long or you will blow your brains out.
Jopa, do us all a favor and eat some beans-a lot of beans!!!!
Insanity is a naked ape trying to keep it’s environment unbearably cold.
#15 is off by three orders of magnitude. Here’s my google result:
Results 1 – 10 of about 118,000 for “record cold”
I’ve tried a few alternative wordings. These ones seem not too bad:
1,780,000 for “record low temperature”.
2,020,000 for “record high temperature”.
Of course, it could simply be a measure of rabidity rather than of records.
This is an indication of how callous the whole Climate bureaucracy is toward the simplest needs of human beings. Being more concerned with its arbitrarily established ideal environmental goals. We can all just stave and freeze to near death, until their ideals are met. Maybe this is the UN’s secret plan to reduce the world’s excess population (except in China). And so AGW is just made up as an excuse.
BTW, these brainiacs didn’t think to cycle the line thru the lobby, just to warm them up a little. What? They’d run out of velvet rope? If they can’t even manage simple numbers, concerning crowd size, in the present. How can they accurately predicted climate numbers in the far future?
Now, now if the father of the internet says all the bad weather is the fault of man made toxins like CO2 how can you question the man? Has he ever been wrong before?
I believe the Internet is to blame for global warming. Kill its inventor and we’ll solve the problem
#18
No, please don’t. That would foster more confusion than necessary and then more BS from people’s mouth. It isn’t a debate anyone of us small fry can “win.” Just say your peace and be done I say.
I’m already lmao from irony because people who want to disbelieve and/or do absolutely nothing are usually the most vocal in the discussions. Why can’t people who want nothing to be done, when it IS a good thing, always complaining.
This will keep me laughing for all ages I think.
You can tell there not Americans, I don’t see any fat people?
#28 jbellies
I am not saying you are wrong, but I am very curious at this point about the discrepancy in google search results. I just search for ‘record cold’ and got:
“Results 1 – 10 of about 107,000,000 for record cold. (0.29 seconds)”
It is curious that this is a few million less than Ah_Yeah but still way more that what you are finding.
#15 #28 #34. Note the difference that using quotation marks makes! It searches for the exact phrase, rather than all of the words anywhere in the page. google 101. #15 implied that he used quotation marks. If he carelessly didn’t, that would explain his anomalous results.