Trash on Global Warming, by Sara Palin ?
in [Repair]
|
From: akiarmy on 9 Dec 2009 17:23 Trash on Global Warming, by Sara Palin ? --------------------------------------------------------- Is Sara Palin a scientist, or a philosopher ? In the differentiated trash, is necessary to distinguish, in any case. The CO2 gas in mucho more than the past century, only because the combustions are too much. Sara want to warm up Alaska ? Only for this motive want she the Global Warming ? In Texas the green grasses now are changed in yellow : the crops have been spoiled by the aridity. Why want Sara to destroy Texas economy ? Akiarmy ================================================ COMBUSTION IS O2 (air) + C (oil or wood, or carbon) = CO2 (greenhouse gas) ================================================ Were not enough the school training, SARA ? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
From: Franc Zabkar on 9 Dec 2009 18:50 I was recently cogitating about the contribution of spam to climate change. If we assume that there are a billion Internet connected computers, each processing umpteen terabytes of spam per year, and each expending an additional gazillion CPU cycles, then it stands to reason that there must be a significant environmental impact, perhaps several centimetres of sea level rise per decade, and several degrees of atmospheric warming. If we could convince our legislators to view spammers as ecological vandals, rather than merely undesirable consequences of free enterprise, then perhaps there would be a concerted effort to eradicate them. I wonder if my spam filter would qualify me for carbon credits? - Franc Zabkar -- Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
From: Van Chocstraw on 9 Dec 2009 19:37 The mouth with no brain. One of the world's oddities.
From: Robert Macy on 9 Dec 2009 20:34 On Dec 9, 3:50 pm, Franc Zabkar <fzab...(a)iinternode.on.net> wrote: > I was recently cogitating about the contribution of spam to climate > change. > > If we assume that there are a billion Internet connected computers, > each processing umpteen terabytes of spam per year, and each expending > an additional gazillion CPU cycles, then it stands to reason that > there must be a significant environmental impact, perhaps several > centimetres of sea level rise per decade, and several degrees of > atmospheric warming. > > If we could convince our legislators to view spammers as ecological > vandals, rather than merely undesirable consequences of free > enterprise, then perhaps there would be a concerted effort to > eradicate them. > > I wonder if my spam filter would qualify me for carbon credits? > > - Franc Zabkar > -- > Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email. LOL!!! enjoyed immensely.
|
Pages: 1 Prev: 2002 source1 hvac control Next: Old X10 Modules Failing? |