Northwest Indiana Discussion

Northwest Indiana's Leading Discussion Forum
It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 7:50 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:01 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
George McFly wrote:
Maybe some of the brain power in this thread can enlighten me. Since some are quick to dismiss this idea, what is your solution to this problem and how are you helping to make this a better place? BEFORE you all pounce, THERE IS NO MALICE INTENDED. i just want to know.


This might help;

Nuclear Power Now

Nuclear power is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. Nuclear power plants produce no controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates, or greenhouse gases. The use of nuclear power in place of other energy sources helps to keep the air clean, preserve the Earth's climate, avoid ground-level ozone formation and prevent acid rain.

Nuclear power has important implications for our national security. Inexpensive nuclear power, in combination with fuel cell techology, could significantly reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

Nuclear power plants have experienced an admirable safety record. About 20% of electricity generated in the U.S. comes from nuclear power, and in the last forty years of this production, not one single fatality has occurred as a result of the operation of a civilian nuclear power plant in the United States. In comparison, many people die in coal mining accidents every year and approximately ten thousand Americans die every year from pollution related to coal burning.

The nuclear power industry generates approximately 2,000 tons of solid waste annually in the United States. In comparison, coal fueled power plants produce 100,000,000 tons of ash and sludge annually, and this ash is laced with poisons such as mercury and nitric oxide.

Even this 2,000 tons of nuclear waste is not a technical problem. Reprocessing of nuclear fuel, and the implementation of Integral Fast Reactor technology, will enable us to turn the vast majority of what is currently considered waste into energy.

Unfortunately, the voting public has been victimized by forty years of misinformation regarding the safety of nuclear power. The graphs on nuclear energy showing it to be safe, economical, and in our national interest are countered by anti-nuclear activists using fear tactics to frighten the electorate into inaction.

Until we can successfully educate the American electorate on the real pros and cons of nuclear power, we will not be able to engage in a healthy national discussion on the topic.

http://www.nuclearnow.org/

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 5:00 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 pm
Posts: 3800
USMarine wrote:
George McFly wrote:
Maybe some of the brain power in this thread can enlighten me. Since some are quick to dismiss this idea, what is your solution to this problem and how are you helping to make this a better place? BEFORE you all pounce, THERE IS NO MALICE INTENDED. i just want to know.


This might help;

Nuclear Power Now
The nuclear power industry generates approximately 2,000 tons of solid waste annually in the United States. In comparison, coal fueled power plants produce 100,000,000 tons of ash and sludge annually, and this ash is laced with poisons such as mercury and nitric oxide.
Even this 2,000 tons of nuclear waste is not a technical problem. Reprocessing of nuclear fuel, and the implementation of Integral Fast Reactor technology, will enable us to turn the vast majority of what is currently considered waste into energy.

Unfortunately, the voting public has been victimized by forty years of misinformation regarding the safety of nuclear power. The graphs on nuclear energy showing it to be safe, economical, and in our national interest are countered by anti-nuclear activists using fear tactics to frighten the electorate into inaction.

Until we can successfully educate the American electorate on the real pros and cons of nuclear power, we will not be able to engage in a healthy national discussion on the topic.

http://www.nuclearnow.org/

USMoron, you post an article from a PR group for nuclear power to make your point? While they do make some good points regarding how much pollution that coal fired generating plants create, they don't mention badly the US consumer has been ripped off paying for the nukes.
Up until GWB bailed out the banks, the nuclear power bailout was the largest in US history.

http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/deregulation/articles.cfm?ID=4169
Quote:
During the 1970 s and 80 s, many electric utilities foolishly built expensive, dangerous nuclear power plants costing billions of dollars. For many utilities, nuclear power plants caused their electric rates to skyrocket. Other utilities that wisely avoided nuclear power were able to keep their electric rates lower.
The deregulation bills enacted in California, Illinois, Texas, New Jersey, and other states include multi-billion dollar bailouts of the utilities for their bad investments in nuclear power. California utilities will get about $28 billion, much of this sum coming from the backs of hardworking families to pay for their poor management. In Illinois, the utilities are receiving about $14 billion; in Texas, nearly $5 billion; in New Jersey, nearly $9 billion. Nationwide, the utility bailout could total over $200 billion, making it one of the largest bailouts in history. And this bailout money is coming straight out of your pocket.

_________________
In the end, everything will be OK. If it's not OK, it's not the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 5:08 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
For those of you interested, and especially those who believe that man is causing 'global warming', click the link.

(don't bother sporkles, it's way over your head.... :lol: )


http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

Image

An interdisciplinary MIT faculty group decided to study the future of nuclear power because of a belief that this technology is an important option for the United States and the world to meet future energy needs without emitting carbon dioxide and other atmospheric pollutants. Other options include increased efficiency, renewables, and carbon sequestration, and all may be needed for a successful greenhouse gas management strategy. This study, addressed to government, industry, and academic leaders, discusses the interrelated technical, economic, environmental, and political challenges facing a significant increase in global nuclear power utilization over the next half century and what might be done to overcome those challenges.

This study was supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and by MIT's Office of the Provost and Laboratory for Energy and the Environment.

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:19 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 pm
Posts: 3800
USMarine wrote:
For those of you interested, and especially those who believe that man is causing 'global warming', click the link.(don't bother sporkles, it's way over your head.... :lol: )http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

USMoron,
it seems that actually reading the link you provided is way over your head. This is what your link from the MIT study says about the problems of building nuclear power generators.
But the prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited, the report finds, by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term management of nuclear wastes.

You can keep posting links you haven't read for as long as you like,pal. I'll keep on exposing the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

_________________
In the end, everything will be OK. If it's not OK, it's not the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:27 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
sparks wrote:
USMarine wrote:
For those of you interested, and especially those who believe that man is causing 'global warming', click the link.(don't bother sporkles, it's way over your head.... :lol: )http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

USMoron,
it seems that actually reading the link you provided is way over your head. This is what your link from the MIT study says about the problems of building nuclear power generators.
But the prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited, the report finds, by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term management of nuclear wastes.

You can keep posting links you haven't read for as long as you like,pal. I'll keep on exposing the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Back on this subject, SPORKLES? Thought you got an asswhippin' on the other board. Give it up. You are too stupid to even think about solving the world's energy problems. Why not stick to something you know about. Like cashing your NEXT unemployment check! Or do you get direct deposit?

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:59 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
LoisLane wrote:
sparks wrote:
USMarine wrote:
For those of you interested, and especially those who believe that man is causing 'global warming', click the link.(don't bother sporkles, it's way over your head.... :lol: )http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

USMoron,
it seems that actually reading the link you provided is way over your head. This is what your link from the MIT study says about the problems of building nuclear power generators.
But the prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited, the report finds, by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term management of nuclear wastes.

You can keep posting links you haven't read for as long as you like,pal. I'll keep on exposing the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Back on this subject, SPORKLES? Thought you got an asswhippin' on the other board. Give it up. You are too stupid to even think about solving the world's energy problems. Why not stick to something you know about. Like cashing your NEXT unemployment check! Or do you get direct deposit?


The sporkles is a funny little man.
I think most people get a kick out of watching posters taking turns schooling him...... :smt005 :smt006

As I told him when I posted the MIT study, it was way over his head.
Most technical papers relating to studies start out by stating the problem.
If the troll would have read past the first few lines where he was so intent on proving me wrong he would have realized (possibly) that there were more words.

The paper doesn't take a political stand one way or another and indeed, it espouses many of the positions that sporkles the pious holds.

Too funny.... :lol:


The study offers a number of recommendations for making the nuclear energy option viable, including:

Placing increased emphasis on the once-through fuel cycle as best meeting the criteria of low costs and proliferation resistance;

Offering a limited production tax-credit to 'first movers' - private sector investors who successfully build new nuclear plants. This tax credit is extendable to other carbon-free electricity technologies and is not paid unless the plant operates;

Having government more fully develop the capabilities to analyze life-cycle health and safety impacts of fuel cycle facilities;

Advancing a U.S. Department of Energy balanced long-term waste management R&D program.
Urging DOE to establish a Nuclear System Modeling project that would collect the engineering data and perform the analysis necessary to evaluate alternative reactor concepts and fuel cycles using the criteria of cost, safety, waste, and proliferation resistance. Expensive development projects should be delayed pending the outcome of this multi-year effort.

Giving countries that forego proliferation- risky enrichment and reprocessing activities a preferred position to receive nuclear fuel and waste management services from nations that operate the entire fuel cycle.

The authors of the study emphasized that nuclear power is not the only non-carbon option and stated that they believe it should be pursued as a long term option along with other options such as the use of renewable energy sources, increased efficiency, and carbon sequestration..

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 8:18 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 pm
Posts: 3800
USMarine wrote:
sparks wrote:
USMarine wrote:
For those of you interested, and especially those who believe that man is causing 'global warming', click the link.(don't bother sporkles, it's way over your head.... :lol: )http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

USMoron,
it seems that actually reading the link you provided is way over your head. This is what your link from the MIT study says about the problems of building nuclear power generators.
But the prospects for nuclear energy as an option are limited, the report finds, by four unresolved problems: high relative costs; perceived adverse safety, environmental, and health effects; potential security risks stemming from proliferation; and unresolved challenges in long-term management of nuclear wastes.

You can keep posting links you haven't read for as long as you like,pal. I'll keep on exposing the fact that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.


The sporkles is a funny little man.
I think most people get a kick out of watching posters taking turns schooling him...... :smt005 :smt006

As I told him when I posted the MIT study, it was way over his head.
Most technical papers relating to studies start out by stating the problem.
If the troll would have read past the first few lines where he was so intent on proving me wrong he would have realized (possibly) that there were more words.

The paper doesn't take a political stand one way or another and indeed, it espouses many of the positions that sporkles the pious holds.

Too funny.... :lol:


The study offers a number of recommendations for making the nuclear energy option viable, including:

Placing increased emphasis on the once-through fuel cycle as best meeting the criteria of low costs and proliferation resistance;

Offering a limited production tax-credit to 'first movers' - private sector investors who successfully build new nuclear plants. This tax credit is extendable to other carbon-free electricity technologies and is not paid unless the plant operates;

Having government more fully develop the capabilities to analyze life-cycle health and safety impacts of fuel cycle facilities;

Advancing a U.S. Department of Energy balanced long-term waste management R&D program.
Urging DOE to establish a Nuclear System Modeling project that would collect the engineering data and perform the analysis necessary to evaluate alternative reactor concepts and fuel cycles using the criteria of cost, safety, waste, and proliferation resistance. Expensive development projects should be delayed pending the outcome of this multi-year effort.

Giving countries that forego proliferation- risky enrichment and reprocessing activities a preferred position to receive nuclear fuel and waste management services from nations that operate the entire fuel cycle.

The authors of the study emphasized that nuclear power is not the only non-carbon option and stated that they believe it should be pursued as a long term option along with other options such as the use of renewable energy sources, increased efficiency, and carbon sequestration..

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

SFB's, if nuclear power is such a wonderful option,why did private companies invest over $20 Billion dollars last year on new wind turbines while spending exactly zero dollars on building new nuclear facilities in the US?

_________________
In the end, everything will be OK. If it's not OK, it's not the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 8:25 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
Image




Nuclear Power Now

Nuclear power is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. Nuclear power plants produce no controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates, or greenhouse gases. The use of nuclear power in place of other energy sources helps to keep the air clean, preserve the Earth's climate, avoid ground-level ozone formation and prevent acid rain.

Nuclear power has important implications for our national security. Inexpensive nuclear power, in combination with fuel cell techology, could significantly reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

Nuclear power plants have experienced an admirable safety record. About 20% of electricity generated in the U.S. comes from nuclear power, and in the last forty years of this production, not one single fatality has occurred as a result of the operation of a civilian nuclear power plant in the United States. In comparison, many people die in coal mining accidents every year and approximately ten thousand Americans die every year from pollution related to coal burning.

The nuclear power industry generates approximately 2,000 tons of solid waste annually in the United States. In comparison, coal fueled power plants produce 100,000,000 tons of ash and sludge annually, and this ash is laced with poisons such as mercury and nitric oxide.

Even this 2,000 tons of nuclear waste is not a technical problem. Reprocessing of nuclear fuel, and the implementation of Integral Fast Reactor technology, will enable us to turn the vast majority of what is currently considered waste into energy.

Unfortunately, the voting public has been victimized by forty years of misinformation regarding the safety of nuclear power. The graphs on nuclear energy showing it to be safe, economical, and in our national interest are countered by anti-nuclear activists using fear tactics to frighten the electorate into inaction.

Until we can successfully educate the American electorate on the real pros and cons of nuclear power, we will not be able to engage in a healthy national discussion on the topic.

http://www.nuclearnow.org/

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 8:56 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:17 pm
Posts: 3800
USMarine wrote:
Nuclear power is the world's largest source of emission-free energy. Nuclear power plants produce no controlled air pollutants, such as sulfur and particulates, or greenhouse gases. The use of nuclear power in place of other energy sources helps to keep the air clean, preserve the Earth's climate, avoid ground-level ozone formation and prevent acid rain.

Nuclear power has important implications for our national security. Inexpensive nuclear power, in combination with fuel cell techology, could significantly reduce our dependency on foreign oil.

Nuclear power plants have experienced an admirable safety record. About 20% of electricity generated in the U.S. comes from nuclear power, and in the last forty years of this production, not one single fatality has occurred as a result of the operation of a civilian nuclear power plant in the United States. In comparison, many people die in coal mining accidents every year and approximately ten thousand Americans die every year from pollution related to coal burning.

The nuclear power industry generates approximately 2,000 tons of solid waste annually in the United States. In comparison, coal fueled power plants produce 100,000,000 tons of ash and sludge annually, and this ash is laced with poisons such as mercury and nitric oxide.

Even this 2,000 tons of nuclear waste is not a technical problem. Reprocessing of nuclear fuel, and the implementation of Integral Fast Reactor technology, will enable us to turn the vast majority of what is currently considered waste into energy.

Unfortunately, the voting public has been victimized by forty years of misinformation regarding the safety of nuclear power. The graphs on nuclear energy showing it to be safe, economical, and in our national interest are countered by anti-nuclear activists using fear tactics to frighten the electorate into inaction.

Until we can successfully educate the American electorate on the real pros and cons of nuclear power, we will not be able to engage in a healthy national discussion on the topic.

http://www.nuclearnow.org/

Hey dumbass, you already posted that article once. So, I will ask you again, if nuclear power is so wonderful, why won't private companies invest in it?
USMoron, you post an article from a PR group for nuclear power to make your point? While they do make some good points regarding how much pollution that coal fired generating plants create, they don't mention badly the US consumer has been ripped off paying for the nukes.
Up until GWB bailed out the banks, the nuclear power bailout was the largest in US history.

http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/deregulation/articles.cfm?ID=4169
Quote:
During the 1970 s and 80 s, many electric utilities foolishly built expensive, dangerous nuclear power plants costing billions of dollars. For many utilities, nuclear power plants caused their electric rates to skyrocket. Other utilities that wisely avoided nuclear power were able to keep their electric rates lower.
The deregulation bills enacted in California, Illinois, Texas, New Jersey, and other states include multi-billion dollar bailouts of the utilities for their bad investments in nuclear power. California utilities will get about $28 billion, much of this sum coming from the backs of hardworking families to pay for their poor management. In Illinois, the utilities are receiving about $14 billion; in Texas, nearly $5 billion; in New Jersey, nearly $9 billion. Nationwide, the utility bailout could total over $200 billion, making it one of the largest bailouts in history. And this bailout money is coming straight out of your pocket.

_________________
In the end, everything will be OK. If it's not OK, it's not the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:02 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
Image


Pay no attention to the troll behind the keyboard..... :smt005 :smt006


Here are some interesting facts and answers to many of the questions people have about nuclear energy.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT NUCLEAR ENERGY
by John McCarthy
This page discusses nuclear energy as a part of a more general discussion of why human material progress is sustainable and should be sustained. Energy is just one of the questions considered.

Up to: Main page on why progress is sustainable

Incidentally, I'm Professor of Computer Science at Stanford University, emeritus (means retired) as of 2001 January 1. Here's my main page. I write about sustainability as a volunteer public service. I am not professionally involved with nuclear energy.

Here's a new page on Nuclear Energy Now. It is motivated by the Bush Administration in the U.S. having tentatively re-opened the question of building new nuclear plants in the U.S. I hope they persist and are successful.

One of the major requirements for sustaining human progress is an adequate source of energy. The current largest sources of energy are the combustion of coal, oil and natural gas. These are discussed in the main page on energy. They will last quite a while but will probably run out or become harmful in tens to hundreds of years. Solar energy will also work but is not much developed yet except for special applications because of its high cost. This high cost as a main source, e.g. for central station electricity, is likely to continue, and nuclear energy is likely to remain cheaper. A major advantage of nuclear energy (and also of solar energy) is that it doesn't put carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere. How much of an advantage depends on how bad the CO2 problem turns out to be.
Q. What are the details on nuclear energy?

A. It is somewhat complicated and depends on facts about nuclear physics and nuclear engineering.

Read the rest here;

http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/prog ... r-faq.html

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:12 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
Quote:
Pipestone Wind Turbine Plant Laying Off Up to 160
The Associated Press


A wind power company in southwestern Minnesota has announced it will eliminate 70 jobs this summer with another 90 layoffs possible by the end of September. According to a letter sent to city officials, Suzlon will make the first round of layoffs at the Pipestone turbine blade plant by Aug. 2. Another 90 job losses will likely be added to that tally. Pipestone Mayor Laurie Ness says the news is "crushing blow" to the city

.

http://www.ksfy.com/news/local/47199567.html



according to splats ravings about this wind farm bullshit it was the future of generating electricity ....

Are there people really stupid enough to think wind farms will come anywhere close to supplying the electricity we consume on a daily basis?

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:17 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:23 am
Posts: 1641
Moby Grape wrote:
according to splats ravings about this wind farm bullshit it was the future of generating electricity ....

Are there people really stupid enough to think wind farms will come anywhere close to supplying the electricity we consume on a daily basis?

Yes, two people. Splats, and the guy he bought the swampland from to build his wind farm.

_________________
My sole purpose in life is to be an example for others not to follow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 11:33 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:16 am
Posts: 257
Location: The armpit of Indiana
USMarine wrote:
Image


Pay no attention to the troll behind the keyboard..... :smt005 :smt006




Why is it that everytime someone makes you look stupid, or has an opinion different than yours they become a troll? You appear to be the true troll by definition on this board. (oh no, now I'm a troll)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:23 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
Politician's R Liars wrote:
USMarine wrote:
Image


Pay no attention to the troll behind the keyboard..... :smt005 :smt006




Why is it that everytime someone makes you look stupid, or has an opinion different than yours they become a troll? You appear to be the true troll by definition on this board. (oh no, now I'm a troll)



:laughing3:


On the contrary, you're just a punk.

And for your info, the only people I have labeled trolls are the two people who truly fit the description and come here day after day to insult and try to derail threads. I noticed you haven't taken either one of them to task for all the name calling and insults but you are quick to jump in and not contibute to thread and at the same time call me stupid.
Sporkles and hedge are your buddies....yes?

Carry on.

:salute:

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wind Power in Northwest Indiana
PostPosted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:52 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:16 am
Posts: 257
Location: The armpit of Indiana
USMarine wrote:


On the contrary, you're just a punk.



Wow, that was impressive! Yeah you are right I had nothing at all to contribute to this thread, simply logged in to call you an azzhole!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group