Study: The Missing Heat Is Not Hiding In The Deep Oceans

Another nail in the coffin of the Cult of Climastrology, destroying yet another talking point regarding the Pause

(The Hockey Schtick) A new paper published in Ocean Science Discussions directly contradicts the claim that “90%” of the alleged “missing heat” from anthropogenic global warming has disappeared into the deep oceans below 2000 meters. This was, according to the authors, the favored excuse (out of more than 70 ‘excuses’ at this point) for the “pause” or “hiatus” of global warming over the past 18+ years.

Warming of the deep oceans, however, would cause thermal expansion of the deep oceans and add to sea level rise [called steric sea level rise]. The authors examined several datasets including satellite altimetry, ARGO floats, and the GRACE gravitometer satellites, and find that the thermal expansion of the deep oceans and contribution to sea level rise is “negligible,” and thus, there is no evidence that the alleged “missing heat” “trapped” by greenhouse gases has somehow sunken to the deep oceans. In addition, the “missing heat” is also nowhere to be found in the upper oceans, nor the atmosphere (because in reality it was lost to space as increased outgoing IR radiation over the past 62 years).

The authors find the sea level budget of total sea level rise is “closed” with “negligible” contribution from the deep ocean, thus no warming or thermal expansion from the “missing heat” in the deep ocean can be accounted for:

Of course, actual facts will not stop the CoC, nor will it even force them to move on from this excuse. They will continue to propagate the excuse, as well as all the others, and certainly come up with new ones, in order to protect their political beliefs. And they are political beliefs, not scientific beliefs. The Pause contradicts 95% of the computer models. This is very inconvenient for the CoC in pushing their hardcore Progressive policy prescriptions.

As usual, let’s be clear on an important point: the fight is not on warming, but causation. Warmists proclaim that all the warming is mostly/solely caused by Mankind. Yet, most of their excuses involve natural phenomena. Why can’t those same natural phenomena have caused most of the warming?

Excerpts and a link to the full paper available at The Hockey Schtick.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

21 Responses to “Study: The Missing Heat Is Not Hiding In The Deep Oceans”

  1. Jeffery says:

    This is old news. The ocean below 2000m hasn’t expanded, therefore little warming there.

    When I tried to track down the Hockey Suckers’ claim that “warmists” said the heat was in the deep ocean, he cited The Economist, not a scientific paper.

    An article published last week in The Economist proclaims, “the mystery of the pause in global warming may have been solved. The answer seems to lie at the bottom of the sea.”

    Kind of like Newsweek/Time worrying about an ice age in the 1970s.

    This is tried and true debate tactic. The upper ocean (less than 2000m deep) is warming and expanding. The ocean below 2000m is not. So the Deniers use the data below 2000m to claim the ocean is not warming!

    By the way, there is no pause in warming.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    So little jeffy either can’t or won’t Google Trenberth and the missing heat.
    Another leftist denial.

  3. Jeffery says:

    little puppy is much smarter than I, obviously. Can you help me out and show me where Trenberth said the ocean deeper than 2000m was storing the non-existent “pause”?

    I’m sure you’re familiar with:

    http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/Trenberth/website-archive/trenberth.papers-moved/Balmaseda_Trenberth_Kallen_grl_13.pdf

    published in 2013 where Trenberth calls 700-2000m the “deep ocean” (which is clearly warming).

    You may be right, but can you show the citation where Trenberth claimed the ocean deeper than 2000m was warming (Denier blogs are not legitimate citations)?

    It’s possible the Hockey Schmuck is just confused, but it seems likely he is deliberately trying to mislead.

  4. liam Thomas says:

    The University of Colorado Boulder just released a report in which they studied the sea level rise for the last 50 years.

    Their conclusions were that the sea levels increased 1.4mm/year +-/.4mm per year. or roughly 1mm per year for 50 years.

    An IPCC Estimate for the 20th century showed that global average sea level rose at a rate of about 1.7 mm yr–1. or between .7mm and 1.7mm on average averaging right around 1 mm per year for the entire 20th century.

    Now 1mmx50 years translates to 1.98 inches rise and 1mmx100 years would equal 3.98 inches sea level rise for a 100 year time reference or as the IPCC states the entire 20th century.

    Now as to thermal expansion and the dynamic effects this would have in reference to sea level rise for both time references of the entire 20th century and more particularly for the last 50 years….a time in which the co2 has risen rather dramatically we find more evidence presented by NOAA themselves:

    According to Noaa Graphing the sea has warmed by a factor of 18×10(22)joules since the 1980’s or the time frame referenced in the UC paper. This is an awfully large amount of heat which would certainly cause thermal expansion of the oceans accounting for nearly all of the current sea level rise of only 1mm/year.

    When you break down the oceans based upon 1 degree latitude and longitude readings the graphs essentially show a vastly differnt set of readings per long/lat degree.

    The Linear trends of zonally averaged thermosteric, halosteric, and total steric sea levels for individual ocean basins and the world ocean show that the overall ocean is in balance and while in certain areas the ocean is warming in other areas the ocean is noticeably much cooler.

    However how can various reports by reputable sources all conclude the same basic thing?

    That conclusion is the salinity of the oceans is remaining relatively stagnant which would indicate that fresh water is not changing the relative salinity of the oceans.

    Additionally when looking at the projected thermal expansion based upon the calculated Joules of heat retained in the oceans the Thermal Expansion should be far greater then it is and it is not….Combine that with fresh water from melting glaciers and the resulting sea level rise should be on the order of the 4mm/year that Mann and company forecasted but has not come about for 115 years.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Can you link to the CU paper?

    When I Googled “CU Boulder sea level” I got this site:

    http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/2015rel2-global-mean-sea-level-time-series-seasonal-signals-removed

    where they found an average yearly increase of 3.3 +/- 0.4 mm/ year for the past 20+ years.

    They also list the other global mean sea level rates of change from other researchers and found:

    CU: 3.3 ± 0.4 mm/yr
    AVISO: 3.3 ± 0.6 mm/yr
    CSIRO: 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/yr
    NASA GSFC: 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/yr
    NOAA: 3.2 ± 0.4 mm/yr

  6. […] what William Teach of The Pirate’s Cove calls climatology. It’s an apt […]

  7. Liam Thomas says:

    Here is an excellent article to read Jeffery.

    http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/07/21/cu-boulder-old-dominion-team-finds-sea-level-rise-western-tropical-pacific

    Now after you digest this article and stand validated that your concerns about the seas rising are legitimate……….

    Do a search for something called…..glacial isostatic adjustment

    Then when you feel as if you totally understand GIA’s then insert that knowledge into the above article and tell me what you conclude.

  8. Liam Thomas says:

    University of Vermont researchers have discovered a 3 million-year-old ancient tundra landscape below the Greenland Ice Sheet.

    University of Vermont geologist Paul Bierman said that organic soil was found frozen at the bottom of the ice sheet.

    Bierman said that since its formation the ice-sheet has remained steady and not melted completely at any time, even during the warmest periods. This eventually buried the tundra landscape under ice through millions of years of global warming and cooling.

    The researchers also examined nitrogen and carbon (left by plant material) levels in the core sample and discovered significant amounts of organic material, indicating that the soil must have been exposed at the surface somewhere between 200,000 and one million years before being covered by ice.

    But WHEN did the Greenland Ice sheet form?

    Okay why is this important. Because in the most recent IPCC Assessment they claim the greenland Ice sheet will melt by 2300. or in 200 years.

    However look at the time frame there.

    3 million years ago….smack dab in the middle of the??

    The last time the CO2 was around 415 PPM was the Pliocene epoch.

    To wit:Last Time CO2 Levels Hit 400 Parts Per Million & Humans Were Alive — Never

    “One of our major findings is that the Arctic was very warm in the Pliocene [~ 5.3 to 2.6 million years ago] when others have suggested atmospheric CO2 was very much like levels we see today. This could tell us where we are going in the near future. In other words, the Earth system response to small changes in carbon dioxide is bigger than suggested by earlier models,” the authors state.

    and…….

    Another significant finding to emerge from this first continuous, high-resolution record of the Middle Pliocene is documentation of sustained warmth with summer temperatures of about 59 to 61 degrees F [15 to 16 degrees C], about 8 degrees C [14 F] warmer than today.

    But wait…..Greenland was buried in ice during the Pliocene or someones lying here. Even though the earth was a good 8 degrees warmer then today.

    So lets see 415 ppm of Co2 during the Pliocene era…..415 PPM of co2 today. Greenland was covered in ice after enduring 2 million years of bake oven like temperatures of the Pliocene Epoch.
    Greenland is still covered in ice today.

    Now here is an interesting tidbit of information for those who want to know…….

    The continents are always shifting….in fact they are moving at the very instant you are reading this……….

    So lets look at the continents during the Pliocene Epoch……Gosh they werent even similiar to today.

    Say it aint so joe.

    In fact the continents were basically squeezed together forcing the warm currents farther north and southward into polar lanes that are today no longer available. As the continents continued to drift over the 3 million Epoch the shifting of the continents moved the warm water farther south and eventually the end of the Pliocene created the last great Ice age that started about 2.4 million years ago.

    When looking back at the earth and trying to glean information about the future…..Its totally an exercise in futility. As the continents drift they create new lanes and bottlenecks shifting the great tides and shifting the warmth of the oceans to differing parts of the world.

    Geology is the great key to understanding weather and shifting continents seems to have totally escaped todays AGW crowd as they scramble to say…..see it was hot back then when there was 415 PPM of CO2 that means were all doomed………

    And in reality the earth is headed for nothing like the Pliocene epoch.

    Ignorance is the AGW crowds greatest weapon.

  9. Jeffery says:

    Do a search for something called…..glacial isostatic adjustment

    Then when you feel as if you totally understand GIA’s then insert that knowledge into the above article and tell me what you conclude.

    No thanks. If you have a point, you should try to make it.

    As it stands you refused to supply a citation to support your previous claim.

  10. gitarcarver says:

    No thanks. If you have a point, you should try to make it.

    As it stands you refused to supply a citation to support your previous claim.

    Figures.

    Not only won’t Jeffery look at the data and the source, he blames someone else for his continued ignorance.

    That is the behavior not of a honest scientist, but a member of a cult.

  11. Jeffery says:

    gitarcarver,

    Liam is once again trying to use smoke and mirrors to confuse the issue. He won’t directly make his “point” because it refutes his earlier arguments. He wants you to believe that the GIA correction brings the 3.3 mm/yr value to his 1.4 mm/yr value. Then he’ll type another 1000 off-topic words loaded with “sciency” terms.

    I politely asked for the citation for his earlier claim. As a skeptic, I have to ask if he didn’t just make it up.

    The original point of this post was whether the lack of volume change in the ocean deeper than 2000m refuted the fact that the oceans are warming and rising. The ocean shallower than 2000m (that’s over a mile deep) are warming.

  12. gitarcarver says:

    Jeffery,

    “As a AGW cult member, I have to ignore anything that shows I might be wrong.”

    There.

    Fixed that for ya.

  13. liam Thomas says:

    I politely asked for the citation for his earlier claim. As a skeptic, I have to ask if he didn’t just make it up.

    No your using Saul Alinsky tactics to attack the integrity of the speaker in order to discredit anything he might say now or in the future.

    He refuses to actually have a discussion because of Saul Alinsky Rules. He would be forced to state his opinion on something he knows nothing about….this then forces him to defend his position. Its much easier as he says to say…..the earth is warming and its because of co2 and then force you to rebut a simpleton statement with facts and knowledge….to which he replies the earth is warming and its because of c02.

    We commence our watery journey with this short excerpt from the book ‘The Little Ice Age’ by Brian Fagan, Professor of Archaeology at the University of California.

    “Ten thousand years ago the southern North Sea was a marshy plain where elk and deer wandered…England was part of the continent until as recently as 6000 BC when rising sea levels caused by post ice age warming filled the North sea.”

    The IPCC AR4 statement on historic sea level rise from AD0 is cited below:

    “Yes, there is strong evidence that global sea level gradually rose in the 20th century and is currently rising at an increased rate, after a period of little change between AD 0 and AD 1900. Sea level is projected to rise at an even greater rate in this century.

    The two major causes of global sea level rise are thermal expansion of the oceans (water expands as it warms) and the loss of land-based ice due to increased melting…

    Global sea level rose by about 120 m during the several millennia that followed the end of the last ice age (approximately 21,000 years ago), and stabilised between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago. Sea level indicators suggest that global sea level did not change significantly from then until the late 19th century. The instrumental record of modern sea level change shows evidence for onset of sea level rise during the 19th century. *****Estimates for the 20th century show that global average sea level rose at a rate of about 1.7 mm yr–1.”******

    IPCC 4th Assessment 2007.

    https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/10090/global-sea-level-rise-dampened-australia-floods

    I thought I would throw this in the mix because matter can be neither created nor destroyed. But for an 18-month period beginning in 2010, the oceans mysteriously dropped by about 7 millimeters (about 0.3 inches), more than offsetting the annual rise.

    http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2011-262

    Yet the Jet Propulsion Lab…another AGW bandwagoner because it gets its funding from government shows this same pothole as only 5mm. Even the AGW group cant get their facts straight.

    http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/sealevel/

    Digging way deep under the Hubris of were all gonna drown by this site……we find this gem in the paper……..

    The rate of actual SLR in Hawai’i (approximately 1.5 mm/yr at Honolulu and Nawiliwili) presently lags behind the global average (approximately 3.2 mm/yr) of the past two decades; will this behavior continue?

    Now why would the south pacific have a 5-7mm loss of sea level rise for 2 years…..Yet we find on the northern East coast of the USA during this same time an increase of 2 inches……Now when you average this guess what you get? A sea level rise even though the 2 inch increase was due to circulation pattern changes….Interestingly enough….the upwelling in the Atlantic happened at the same time the Pacific lost 5-7 MM of sea level rise.

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-07/uoca-cod071814.php

    Included in this hubris of were all gonna drown is this gem…….Although global sea level patterns are not geographically uniform — sea level rise in some areas correlate with sea level fall in other areas — the average current global sea level rise is roughly 3 millimeters per year. Some scientists are estimating global seas may rise by a meter or more by the end of the century as a result of greenhouse warming.

    the Average rise? How is this measured?

    http://www.nersc.no/sites/www.nersc.no/files/3-wunsch_sealevel_bergen_2011.pdf

    Enjoy the read….it will open some eyes…shut others.

    http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2011/Winter-2010/Morner.pdf

    One has to consider that observation vs modeling is used to get from 1mm to the 3.4 MM used by the modeling agencies to keep the funding coming.

    How exactly is the sea level rise measured if at one point in the ocean the seas are rising and at other points they are falling? How do we come up with this so called AVERAGE?

    http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/oceans/sea-level.html

    Tide Guages and Satellite measurements… Notice in this graph funded by the EPA….

    We find that from 1880 to 2015 the oceans have risen a little over 8 inches. Further answering Jefferies concerns that I make shit up. 8 inches in 135 years is 203 mm or dividing that by 135 years we get a reading of 1.5mm/yr average.

    Now as to satellite measurements of sea level rise…..

    http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/documents/NOAA_NESDIS_Sea_Level_Rise_Budget_Report_2012.pdf

    AND THE MOST DAMNING REPORT OF ALL ISSUED BY NOAA ITSELF………..

    Read it and weep AGW Truthers. The PROPHET NOAA interesting dont you think NOAH saved the world by riding out FLOODING and NOAA is predicting more flooding to come….yet when they assemble the information they just cant account for even recent sea level rise….hence the report from CU stating that there is only 1mm of sea level rise occuring in line with what NOAA states in this report.

  14. Liam Thomas says:

    We commence our watery journey with this short excerpt from the book ‘The Little Ice Age’ by Brian Fagan, Professor of Archaeology at the University of California.

    “Ten thousand years ago the southern North Sea was a marshy plain where elk and deer wandered…England was part of the continent until as recently as 6000 BC when rising sea levels caused by post ice age warming filled the North sea.”

    The IPCC AR4 statement on historic sea level rise from AD0 is cited below:

    “Yes, there is strong evidence that global sea level gradually rose in the 20th century and is currently rising at an increased rate, after a period of little change between AD 0 and AD 1900. Sea level is projected to rise at an even greater rate in this century.

    The two major causes of global sea level rise are thermal expansion of the oceans (water expands as it warms) and the loss of land-based ice due to increased melting…

    Global sea level rose by about 120 m during the several millennia that followed the end of the last ice age (approximately 21,000 years ago), and stabilised between 3,000 and 2,000 years ago. Sea level indicators suggest that global sea level did not change significantly from then until the late 19th century. The instrumental record of modern sea level change shows evidence for onset of sea level rise during the 19th century. *****Estimates for the 20th century show that global average sea level rose at a rate of about 1.7 mm yr–1.”******

    IPCC 4th Assessment 2007.

    https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/10090/global-sea-level-rise-dampened-australia-floods

    I thought I would throw this in the mix because matter can be neither created nor destroyed. But for an 18-month period beginning in 2010, the oceans mysteriously dropped by about 7 millimeters (about 0.3 inches), more than offsetting the annual rise.

    http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2011-262

    Yet the Jet Propulsion Lab…another AGW bandwagoner because it gets its funding from government shows this same pothole as only 5mm. Even the AGW group cant get their facts straight.

    http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/coasts/sealevel/

    Digging way deep under the Hubris of were all gonna drown by this site……we find this gem in the paper……..

    The rate of actual SLR in Hawai’i (approximately 1.5 mm/yr at Honolulu and Nawiliwili) presently lags behind the global average (approximately 3.2 mm/yr) of the past two decades; will this behavior continue?

    Now why would the south pacific have a 5-7mm loss of sea level rise for 2 years…..Yet we find on the northern East coast of the USA during this same time an increase of 2 inches……Now when you average this guess what you get? A sea level rise even though the 2 inch increase was due to circulation pattern changes….Interestingly enough….the upwelling in the Atlantic happened at the same time the Pacific lost 5-7 MM of sea level rise.

    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-07/uoca-cod071814.php

    Included in this hubris of were all gonna drown is this gem…….Although global sea level patterns are not geographically uniform — sea level rise in some areas correlate with sea level fall in other areas — the average current global sea level rise is roughly 3 millimeters per year. Some scientists are estimating global seas may rise by a meter or more by the end of the century as a result of greenhouse warming.

    the Average rise? How is this measured?

    http://www.nersc.no/sites/www.nersc.no/files/3-wunsch_sealevel_bergen_2011.pdf

    Enjoy the read….it will open some eyes…shut others.

    http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2011/Winter-2010/Morner.pdf

    One has to consider that observation vs modeling is used to get from 1mm to the 3.4 MM used by the modeling agencies to keep the funding coming.

    How exactly is the sea level rise measured if at one point in the ocean the seas are rising and at other points they are falling? How do we come up with this so called AVERAGE?

    http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/oceans/sea-level.html

    Tide Guages and Satellite measurements… Notice in this graph funded by the EPA….

    We find that from 1880 to 2015 the oceans have risen a little over 8 inches. Further answering Jefferies concerns that I make shit up. 8 inches in 135 years is 203 mm or dividing that by 135 years we get a reading of 1.5mm/yr average.

    Now as to satellite measurements of sea level rise…..

    http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/documents/NOAA_NESDIS_Sea_Level_Rise_Budget_Report_2012.pdf

    AND THE MOST DAMNING REPORT OF ALL ISSUED BY NOAA ITSELF………..

    Read it and weep AGW Truthers. The PROPHET NOAA interesting dont you think NOAH saved the world by riding out FLOODING and NOAA is predicting more flooding to come….yet when they assemble the information they just cant account for even recent sea level rise….hence the report from CU stating that there is only 1mm of sea level rise occuring in line with what NOAA states in this report.

  15. Liam Thomas says:

    Actually one only has to look at a report NOAA put out themselves……

    http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/documents/NOAA_NESDIS_Sea_Level_Rise_Budget_Report_2012.pdf

    too see even they show only roughly a 1.5mm per year sea level rise for the same period the Alarmists are claiming ~3.4mm/year.

    IPCC 4th Assessment Report (2007)

    Ignorance is the AGW movements greatest weapon.

    These are the only two things you need to know since it seems the Pirates cove Eats post with multiple links linking studies about sea level rise.

  16. gitarcarver says:

    Liam,

    These are the only two things you need to know since it seems the Pirates cove Eats post with multiple links linking studies about sea level rise.

    To be fair to our esteemed host, the Pirates Cove doesn’t “eat” “posts with multiple links…..” and certainly not just on posts on sea level rise.

    The blogging software allows the owner to set how many links are allowed in a post. Most people keep it at two or three links. The reason for this is that bloggers used to get comments from bots with pages – literally PAGES – of links on everything from erectile dysfunction to handbags to vitamins…etc. It made the comment sections and the blogs unreadable. The limited links was a feature added early on in WordPress to stop the abuse of comment bots.

    If you have a post like the ones you made with all those links, drop Teach a line and tell him you wrote it. He’ll pull it out of the comment filters just as he has done with your posts above. He has done this before for me as well.

    Your posts just happened to get caught in the software that makes the blog a good, legible place without unwanted ads disguised as posts.

  17. Liam Thomas says:

    I figured it was the multiple link thing….the reason I mention AGW links was so that he would look at it and pull it out of the spam filter………..thanks.

  18. Jeffery says:

    In

    http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/documents

    They found 1.5mm/yr from 2005 to 2011, not the same period where everyone else finds 3.3mm/yr. If you look at the graph showing the 1993 through 2015 data you’ll see the 2005-2011 shows a dip (2005 higher than the trend line, 2011 below the trend line). It would be as if Teach chose 1998 as the start of his trend line for average global temperature.

    http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

    hence the report from CU stating that there is only 1mm of sea level rise occurring in line with what NOAA states in this report

    Clearly you and gitar are much more dimensionally talented thinkers than I, and find it easy to integrate all these multiple, disconnected themes. For a simpleton such as I could you, would you, will you supply the citation for the CU-Boulder paper you described?

    Also, no one has even remotely refuted my refutation of the Hockey Schmuck’s skullduggery around conflating the ocean levels to support his point.

    2000m and below – no warming. 2000m and above – much warming. Where does the heat from El Ninos, transferred to the atmosphere, come from?

  19. Jeffery says:

    So little puppy didn’t/couldn’t supply a citation for his claim that Trenberth said the ocean below 2000m was absorbing the heat and causing the non-existent pause.

    So Liam didn’t/couldn’t supply a citation for his claim that CU -Boulder reported a 50 year average increase in sea level rise of 1.4mm/year. Liam rounds that down to 1mm/yr and appears to believe that data, but not the more current data from ostensibly the same group!

    In fact, the 1.4 mm/yr over 5 decades claim may actually be true! But how can we evaluate the claim without the data? The CU data from 1993-2015 clearly show an annual increase of 3.3mm +/- 0.4mm/year. Is the sea level rise increasing more now than decades ago? That’s a valid conclusion.

    Liam accused me of using Alinsky tactics for asking politely for evidence to support his claim.

    With Deniers (and right-wingers) it’s always, and I mean always, projection.

    Disclaimer: Liam claims to have made a fortune from fossil fuels.

  20. Liam Thomas says:

    @Jeffery

    Im not talking to you. Your an astro-turfer whose job is to discredit anything right of LENIN.

    Im talking to other open minded souls who would read what I have to say and then have the audacity to do some study on their own and come to independent conclusions based upon what they are able to decide.

    Disclaimer…..jeffery hates women and children.

  21. drowningpuppies says:

    So little puppy didn’t/couldn’t supply a citation for his claim that Trenberth said the ocean below 2000m was absorbing the heat and causing the non-existent pause.

    Didn’t write that or claim that.
    Once again when little jeffy gets his ass caught in a crack he lies.

Bad Behavior has blocked 5998 access attempts in the last 7 days.