Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 213 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by Marchimedes
02/19/20 02:35 AM
Do we have a moderator?
by Marchimedes
02/19/20 02:25 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Marchimedes 2
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#17089 - 03/27/06 12:32 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
Count Iblis II Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 01/21/05
Posts: 375
Quote:
Originally posted by extrasense:
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
""This is what scientists call a feedback loop, and a similar one is also melting the frozen land called permafrost, much of which has been frozen -- since the end of last ice age in fact, or at least 8,000 years ago.""
Now you are coming around.
The feedback loop is a self-accelerating thing, it does not care wheather you emit CO2 ore not!!!

ES
Not if there is a threshold you have to cross before you enter the feedback loop. Compare this with the feedback loop that causes death in case of heart failure...

Top
.
#17090 - 03/27/06 01:35 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
extrasense Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 427
Loc: USA
Quote:
Originally posted by Count Iblis II:
Quote:
Originally posted by extrasense:
The feedback loop is a self-accelerating thing, it does not care wheather you emit CO2 ore not!!!
Not if there is a threshold you have to cross before you enter the feedback loop.
Well, the claim is that we ARE in the feedback loop.
If the observed changes in ice melting are what they are claimed to be, we are in the loop.

If not, they are just a scaremongering trick.

ES

Top
#17091 - 03/27/06 05:06 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
All loops can be broken. If 1/2 the money spent in Iraq was spent on finding a solution one likely would be found within 10-20 years.

What is fascinating about the current trend is that as temperatures increase ... the need for energy for refrigeration will increase too.

That too is a loop that can be broken.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17092 - 03/27/06 05:51 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
extrasense Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 427
Loc: USA
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
All loops can be broken.
Not by withdrawing the startup cause, that is for sure.
Instead of fake PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC solution, we need real science on the matter.

ES

Top
#17093 - 03/28/06 01:54 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
extrasense wrote:
"Instead of fake PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC solution, we need real science on the matter."

So you propose firing all of the PhD's and grad students at universities, all of the researchers at NOAA and NASA and replacing them with what? Trained seals?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17094 - 03/28/06 01:52 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
extrasense Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 427
Loc: USA
Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
extrasense wrote:
"Instead of fake PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC solution, we need real science on the matter."
So you propose firing all of the PhD's and grad students at universities, all of the researchers at NOAA and NASA and replacing them with what? Trained seals?
Not firing of everyone, just of the fools and crooks that are in control now.
opinion/books_entertainment/reviews/MoniqueEStuart/191271.html
ES

Top
#17095 - 03/28/06 02:47 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
Justine Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 12/07/05
Posts: 191
_________________________
~Justine~

Top
#17096 - 03/28/06 05:24 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
extrasense wrote:
"Not firing of everyone, just of the fools and crooks that are in control now."

Based on your definition that is everyone.

When one person tells you you are stupid you can ignore them.

When everyone tells you you are stupid you need to pay attention.

Everyone at every university, college, and agency such as NASA and NOAA is not a fool. And your proven track record upon which anyone should rely on your statements is?
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17097 - 03/30/06 05:56 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
soilguy Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/28/05
Posts: 414
Loc: North Carolina
The facts are biased against Extra Sense's position!
_________________________
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
--S. Lewis

Top
#17098 - 03/31/06 05:03 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Extrasense is, it appears, a frustrated science student who having failed to make the cut has decided that anyone that does what he can not ... be published in a peer reviewed journal ... is a fool and a crook.

Extrasense ... a bit of unsolicited advise. You have a choice ... change one person, yourself, or change everyone else on the planet.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17099 - 04/09/06 02:00 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
DA Morgan

"the the real effect of global warming, is the sun itself."

Did you perhaps mean cause rather than effect?...

yes your right. i meant cause.

...if you did please explain why that should have a greater and greater affect that just coincidentally coincides with the industrial revolution and the increased emission of green house gases by the so-called intelligent residents of this planet.

its simple. its not haveing a greater effect, its just that we are in the last phase of the ice age.

when the ice age is over there will not be a polar ice cap, greenland will not have glacers, neither will alaska, and antarica will be farm land 6 months of the year. its happen before.

let me try to explain the way we got to where we are today.

2.1 million years ago. there was no ice age. the permian basin and every thing at that altitude was flooded. then yellowstone erupted for the first time. it spewed several hundred cubic miles (yes miles) of magna into the atmosphere and surrounding land. that magna was so explosive because it was pressurised by co2 and so2. these two gasses react with water differently. co2 does not freeze with water, but will form a type of furtilizer that is washed out of the atmosphere into the soil where plants use it. so2, in the cold of the upper atmosphere, joins with the water to form a type of ice crystal that is very low density, it can stay in the upper atmosphere for decades, although there is a gradual decrease in density as some of it starts falling out. these ice crystals for a cloud cover that is highly reflective and does not absorb heat well.

the yellowstone eruption cause enough sulpheric ice to fill the sky clouds long enough that the tempature of the entire earth fell drastically. in the north, the tempature fell 40 to 60 degrees causing huge fields of ice to form in some cases miles deep. fortuantely the earth was a good bit warmer than it is now, and when the cloud cover thinned enough for the sunlight to once again reach lower altitude, the glacers had reached into colorodo, and some parts of kansas, but not farther. had they reached texas, there would have been so much sunlight reflected that the earth would have continued to get colder.

as i said it stop short of there. so the ice began to retreat as the sun kept heating the earth. so the ice was almost gone. then yellowstone erupted a second time about 1.3 million years ago, fortuantely much smaller. the ice once again headed south and again stopped short of texas. once again the sunlight returned (with the sulpher falling out), and the ice once again retreated.

this was repeated about 64000 years ago then. at that time it kicked out 8000 times as much ash as mount st helens. again, fortuantely this was much smaller and the ice did not extend so far. as with the last two times the ice began to retreat, and, were it not for three smaller super valcanos, the ice might have already been melted already.

74000 years ago, a vei class 7 valcano (yellowstone is 8) erupted in Toba, Indonesia, and almost wiped out the human race, not to mention many other types of animals.

then 10000 years ago (at the same time as the mamoth froze in siberia, interesting connection no?) a much smaller one (vie 6 i beleive) erupted in north america (im not sure where this was, origon i believe). this expanded the ice age, allowing humans to develop in a much cooler area.

then 5000 years ago, the baby of supervalcanos erupted in the mediteranian and extend the ice age a small amount. it also cause a drought that almost wipe out china, and did destroy a south american civilaztion.

as a result, the ice pack is still there and is gradually declining.

some time in the last 2000 years, man began to alter the equation a small amount. he has produced green house gases and has cut down trees in areas that kept water sheds undercontrol, then he did more and more. while these have increased the speed of the loss of the ice shelf, he did not start it, nor has he been the only cause of its increase in speed of its loss.

as more ice is loss, the amount of energy reflected by the snow is deminished and the amount that is absorbed is increased. without man the snow packs decrease in size would be decreasing anyway, but not as fast. man has caused it to disappear faster, but not by that much.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#17100 - 04/09/06 02:09 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
DA Morgan wrote
And for those that still don't get it try this:

The climate is crashing, and global warming is to blame!

Not my words ... those of Time Magazine.

so now we are suppose to believe that a scare monger magazine (one that gets most of its readers by writing things that are designed to scare ppl) to be a major authority?

no. just because it was written in a non scientific magazine, we are suppose to believe that this is something that we need to do immeadiately.

the reality is, the feed back loop was started 640000 years ago, then destroy, and rebuilt 74000 years ago, then once again, 10000 years ago. this is much older than man.

by the by. the ice age did not end 8000 years ago. there is still ice in the polar regions and the permian basin is still dry. when these are not there, the ice age will be over.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#17101 - 04/09/06 04:51 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
dehammer wrote:
"its simple. its not haveing a greater effect, its just that we are in the last phase of the ice age."

And you got this information, contradicted by NASA, NOAA, and researchers at most major universities where?

The climate doesn't care whether Time magazine posts hyperbole or pictures of Paris Hilton's underwear. Using someone's responsible, or irresponsible, statements as an argument when we are discussing research results from major scientific organizations around the globe is just plain nonsense and an attempt to change the focus.

You've been caught.

You have some science on your side? ... reference it. You have hyperbole on your side? Blow up a balloon with it.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17102 - 04/09/06 10:46 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
unfortuantely there does not seem to be a site that list all of the facts in one spot.

here is a good starting point

http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/supervolcano/interactive/interactive.html


the problem is that in order to see it, you have to take info from several areas of scince and most ppl are only willing to see their own areas as important and none of the facts from other areas as having anything to do with their own.

an example of this is the ppl you mentioned. "NASA, NOAA, and researchers at most major universities" are concerned with what is happening now. few of them bother with what has happen 600 thousand years ago, let alone what happen 2.1 million years ago.

heres another site to check out

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/7x.html

if you read it states that the earth is usually 8 to 15 degrees c above todays tempature, and only the last billion years have had the amount of glaceral activity as we have now. it also states that the warming trend has been going on for the last 14000 years with a short interuption about 10000 years ago (hmm, wasnt there an eruption of a western us super volcano about then).

a second much smaller interuption accured about 100 bc (interesting enough i found that there was a valcano that erupted then that is on the borderline between super and regular). had it not erupted the ice sheet would have disappeared within the 100 years.

oh, and while im at it, please explain why if he weather is not concerned about times hyberbole, why should we.

ill see if i can find more sites to add to this.

also, i did not intend to say that we are not responsible of an increase in the speed of the warm up. i stated somewhere on the board that we are responsible for increasing the speed, but not the warm up itself.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
#17103 - 04/10/06 02:32 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
Pragmatist Offline
Member

Registered: 03/10/06
Posts: 84
Loc: N.W. U.S.
Just to throw another log on the fire,
(carbon and all):
It's not just about CO2 anymore.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4419880.stm
I find this 'water vapor feedback` possibility most alarming.

Pragmatist

Murphys Law - "Whatever can go wrong will."
McTavishes Corrolary - "And at the worst possible time."
Schlemazzels Theorem - "And guess who gets it in the neck?"

Top
#17104 - 04/10/06 02:44 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
dehammer:
Your web sites are not serious science sites.

Hit Harvard, MIT, CalTech, Stanford, Washington University, Columbia, Oxford, Cambridge, NASA, NOAA. Site with real science conducted by real scientists.

This is not the normal end of an ice. This is warming that can be correlated with human activity. We may not be the entire cause but we are certainly part of the cause.

And cause or not ... future generations will suffer.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#17105 - 04/10/06 11:23 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
tdcanam Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/10/06
Posts: 2
Loc: Ajax Ont. Canada
There is no way that this warming effect is natural.

I have a write up on an overview of effects of global warming on my site http://tdcanam.blogspot.com/.

Check it out.
_________________________
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my money the most.

Top
#17106 - 04/10/06 11:53 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
tdcanam Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 04/10/06
Posts: 2
Loc: Ajax Ont. Canada
CO2 is natural. The ammount being pumped into the atmosphere is def. not natural.

First off, our oceans are being affected. CO2 sequestration in the surface oceans is dropping the oceans pH level, making the water more acidic. As a result, the growth rates of calcium-secreating animals are being deminished.

Coral growth and repair rates are slowing down. Rupert Ormond, a marine biologist from Glasgow University, says that the world's coral reefs will be dead within 50 years because of global warming, and there is nothing we can do to save them.

Without the reefs acting as natural defences protecting our shorelines, we will be left vunerable.

Our oceans are also warming up as a result of global warming. This leads to the melting of ice sheets and caps, and inturn leads to rise in sea level.

Add water to a glass, it fills up. Drop ice cubes in it, it over flows. (the rate of sea-level rise has nearly tripled during the 1970s and since 1993)

The Arctic sea could be free of ice during summer months by 2100. (Average global temperatures are expected to rise 5 degrees by then). From 2002 to 2005, summer Arctic sea ice has covered 20 percent less area than its 1978-2000 summer average.

In Western Siberia, an area of permafrost covering a million square kilometers has recently begun to melt for the first time since it was formed over 11,000 years ago. This permafrost covers the world's largest frozen peat bog. If warming trends continue it will release billions of tons of stored carbon into the atmosphere, accelerating global warming.

Whats worse is that a paper published in 2005 linked a one-degree rise in sea surface temperature to the increase of hurricane intensity.

There were a recorded 26 tropical storms and 14 hurricanes last year, seven of them intense. The 2005 season was the most destructive in recorded history, with 27 named storms and 14 hurricanes, including Katrina, which devastated Louisiana and Mississippi and killed more than 1,300 people.

The forecast for 2006 Atlantic hurricane season, which runs from June 1 to Nov. 30, calls for 17 tropical storms and 9 named hurricanes. Of those hurricanes, five should reach or exceed category 3 on the five-level Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Intensity Scale. There's no relief in sight for the next two decades, for either the number of hurricanes or of particularly intense hurricanes.

Then there is heat. 22 of the hottest years on record have occured since 1980. The six warmest years since the keeping of records began in 1880 have occurred in the past eight years, with 2005 being the hottest year in history.

Things are picking up, and fast. You don't need to be a scientist to see this. Why now? Why lately have things accelerated?

We are nearing a tipping point with our burning of fossil feul, among other things.

We are directly responsible for these effects and it is becoming more and more evident.
_________________________
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my money the most.

Top
#17107 - 04/10/06 03:34 PM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
soilguy Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 09/28/05
Posts: 414
Loc: North Carolina
Quote:
Originally posted by dehammer:
...its simple. its [the sun] not haveing a greater effect, its just that we are in the last phase of the ice age.

when the ice age is over there will not be a polar ice cap, greenland will not have glacers, neither will alaska, and antarica will be farm land 6 months of the year. its happen before.

let me try to explain the way we got to where we are today.

2.1 million years ago. there was no ice age. the permian basin and every thing at that altitude was flooded. then yellowstone erupted for the first time. it spewed several hundred cubic miles (yes miles) of magna into the atmosphere and surrounding land. that magna was so explosive because it was pressurised by co2 and so2. these two gasses react with water differently. co2 does not freeze with water, but will form a type of furtilizer that is washed out of the atmosphere into the soil where plants use it. so2, in the cold of the upper atmosphere, joins with the water to form a type of ice crystal that is very low density, it can stay in the upper atmosphere for decades, although there is a gradual decrease in density as some of it starts falling out. these ice crystals for a cloud cover that is highly reflective and does not absorb heat well.

the yellowstone eruption cause enough sulpheric ice to fill the sky clouds long enough that the tempature of the entire earth fell drastically. in the north, the tempature fell 40 to 60 degrees causing huge fields of ice to form in some cases miles deep. fortuantely the earth was a good bit warmer than it is now, and when the cloud cover thinned enough for the sunlight to once again reach lower altitude, the glacers had reached into colorodo, and some parts of kansas, but not farther. had they reached texas, there would have been so much sunlight reflected that the earth would have continued to get colder.

as i said it stop short of there. so the ice began to retreat as the sun kept heating the earth. so the ice was almost gone. then yellowstone erupted a second time about 1.3 million years ago, fortuantely much smaller. the ice once again headed south and again stopped short of texas. once again the sunlight returned (with the sulpher falling out), and the ice once again retreated.

this was repeated about 64000 years ago then. at that time it kicked out 8000 times as much ash as mount st helens. again, fortuantely this was much smaller and the ice did not extend so far. as with the last two times the ice began to retreat, and, were it not for three smaller super valcanos, the ice might have already been melted already.

74000 years ago, a vei class 7 valcano (yellowstone is 8) erupted in Toba, Indonesia, and almost wiped out the human race, not to mention many other types of animals.

then 10000 years ago (at the same time as the mamoth froze in siberia, interesting connection no?) a much smaller one (vie 6 i beleive) erupted in north america (im not sure where this was, origon i believe). this expanded the ice age, allowing humans to develop in a much cooler area.

then 5000 years ago, the baby of supervalcanos erupted in the mediteranian and extend the ice age a small amount. it also cause a drought that almost wipe out china, and did destroy a south american civilaztion.

as a result, the ice pack is still there and is gradually declining.

some time in the last 2000 years, man began to alter the equation a small amount. he has produced green house gases and has cut down trees in areas that kept water sheds undercontrol, then he did more and more. while these have increased the speed of the loss of the ice shelf, he did not start it, nor has he been the only cause of its increase in speed of its loss.

as more ice is loss, the amount of energy reflected by the snow is deminished and the amount that is absorbed is increased. without man the snow packs decrease in size would be decreasing anyway, but not as fast. man has caused it to disappear faster, but not by that much.
Dehammer: Do you have any references for all this?

I'm not saying you're wrong. A few of your dates are off by an order of magnitude, but I think you just left out a zero here and there (e.g., the last time Yellowstone blew was around 640,000 years ago, not 64,000).

Your definition of "ice age" is a lot more long-term than the typical thinking. Not that you're incorrect (you're not), but after the first reading, I thought, "What the hell is this guy talking about??" This comes from my soils oriented training, as most soils are young, geologically speaking. You would probably call my definition of ice age a glaciation. I'll use those terms from here on.

But regardless, what I've read is that the major ice ages (around four have occurred over the last billion years) are believed to be related to changes in Earth's orbit, while the glaciations and interglacial periods are from atmospheric causes.

So my big question is, how would we know if this is the end of the current ice age, or if it's a more minor change regarding glaciation?
_________________________
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
--S. Lewis

Top
#17108 - 04/13/06 05:21 AM Re: Global Warming PSEUDOSCIENCE
dehammer Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 1089
soilguy wrote:
Dehammer: Do you have any references for all this?...

yes, i gave a couple of the sites i got the data off of. on another post. though, i was told that the geologist that gave that data are not real science, since they dont work for nasa.

... A few of your dates are off by an order of magnitude, but I think you just left out a zero here and there (e.g., the last time Yellowstone blew was around 640,000 years ago, not 64,000)...

yes, i do occasionally make mistakes. that was suppose to have one more zero. thanks for pointing out that typo. most of the data seems to be correct though.

...Your definition of "ice age" is a lot more long-term than the typical thinking. Not that you're incorrect (you're not), but after the first reading, I thought, "What the hell is this guy talking about??" This comes from my soils oriented training, as most soils are young, geologically speaking. You would probably call my definition of ice age a glaciation. I'll use those terms from here on...

they come from the geological terms. yes most of the soil we have now is young in terms of geological. as i understand it the full glacerial (sp?) period includes both the time the ice is created until its gone. glaceral periods are when the ice is increasing or basically stagnet. (my spelling was never much good, but after a ministroke is even worse, sorry). for the last 14000 years the ice has been retreating, with a few minor and one major blimp. all of which coincide with eruptions of super valcanos or very large normal volcano (the technical term are large and very large volcano, the term super is more of a lay term: lay scientist {read not fully trained} refer to caldera type volcanos by that term).

But regardless, what I've read is that the major ice ages (around four have occurred over the last billion years) are believed to be related to changes in Earth's orbit, while the glaciations and interglacial periods are from atmospheric causes...

they have never been able to fully explain them. also they have never proven how the the earth's orbit would change, esp that fast. on the other hand, there is a good coorlation between ice age and the larger super valcano eruptions. check it out for yourself. as far as atmospheric causes, sulpher dioxide ice clouds do fall under that catagory.

...So my big question is, how would we know if this is the end of the current ice age, or if it's a more minor change regarding glaciation?

simple. use the oscam (my memory for names is terrible) razor. the simplist explaination that fits all the data is most likely the correct one.

heres an example. the mini ice age that occured 10000 years ago. oceanogerphers (sp?) will tell you that it occured because the gulf stream stopped. there is no arguement that it did. but their explination of why it stop is a bit complicated and does not include the fact that there was a supervolcano that erupted at the same time.

heres a much simpler explination. its proven that the super volcano erupted then. its also proven that one of the emission of a valcano of any size is sulpher dioxide. its also proven that the sulpher dioxide will form clouds with the water vaper that will stay in the atmosphere for years. its also a proven fact that the clouds will block off a large portion of the suns light, depending on how thick the so2 ice is. its also proven that the gulf stream is sun driven. ice found in the ice shelf from that time shows an increase in sulpher dioxide for more than a decade with it gradually decreasing. its also been proven that the ice has been melting at simular rate for 4 thousand years about that time.

my hyphothisis is that the sun was blocked off from the gulf stream, causeing it to stop. this did not cause the mini ice age, but was an effect of it. the mammoth that was frozen in siberia was killed by the drop in tempatures from spring or early summer (it was eating spring flowers) and was likely buried by an avalance. this would account for its sudden death, the sudden ceacation of acid reaction (a wet coat transmits heat well, loss of heat stops the reaction.)

simple. straight forward. no unproven theories needed to explain it. all facts covered.
_________________________
the more man learns, the more he realises, he really does not know anything.

Top
Page 2 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.