UNTstormchaser

Yeah I had taken that into consideration, but as you said it's rare and mystifying. I can only recall 2 off the top of my head (Keenum, and some receiver from UT whose name escapes me), and I think it's pretty clear why those 2 got it. One went to UT, and the other was going to break records. Publicity and money, cash and fame, recognition and wealth.

There is zero question that the ocean plays the largest role in the climate of the Earth.

It was in some form of article, maybe on meangreensports.com, and I know I read it today, though I am not 100% sure of where exactly that was. But, I read the same thing that the OP posted.

That would make sense. Glad that Dodge didn't screw us big time with that stupid move, though it's funny how an injury actually helped him and the team in the long run.

Agreed, but asking a life form to stop performing the main function of life (reproducing) for the sake of life, is kind of counter-intuitive. Having children isn't really the issue here in the US, that's the issue in poorer nations where people still insist on having 7 kids.

Well then this would have to be his last season in that case, so he must have been granted a Redshirt status for '09 anyways, because he has 2 years left of eligibility.

I was not involved at all in UNT at that time, but isn't Thompson a redshirt junior this year? I'm confused at how he could have a different year of eligibility plus his redshirt year? Someone explain.

Non-waterless urinals might upset some of the hippy students so much that they don't come back.

I actually totally agree with your point UNT90. Though the amount we breathe out pales in comparison to the amount that is produced through the burning of fossil fuels, it is still very significant, and since our population is growing rapidly and we're making the plant population dwindle rapidly, it's a bad combination. I think mother nature will be thinning the herd soon enough, as batshit crazy as that may sound. We're overdue for a major cataclysm. Be it the supervolcano in Yellowstone that is 60,000 years overdue and showing signs of increased activity, the meteor in 2033 that is going to miss us at first but has a 1 in 1,000 chance of hitting us on it's backswing around the Earth, some freakish famine caused by mass drought that could already be beginning, we're due. Or, we could blow ourselves up in a World War 3, which isn't that unlikely either. Thin the herd it is!

Yup, because the fact that we have released billions upon billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere certainly isn't cause for the belief that we can effect and change our environment...

Thanks guys, I'm glad I asked. I would have never figured that out lol.

Stupid question, but I've never been able to figure this out. I know what the SOW is, but what the freak does SOW stand for?

Point 1: refer to my reasoning as for why I believe we do. I don't know if you actually read it or not, but since you aren't responding to my example I have to assume you didn't. Point 2: I understand that about Hybrids. But it's a step in the right direction, and there are better ways to get that energy than by burning fuel**. With technological advancements, we will be able to make cleaner batteries. (**nuclear power.......literally the safest power source other than solar/wind. we switch from burning coal and oil to make electricity to nuclear, and bam, no worries about how we get that energy anymore.) Point 3: I agree to an extent. It's never a bad idea to try to clean up our environment, but I agree that we can't just go overboard with it. But, put slow changing policies in place, kind of like goals. Random example: By the year 2055, 30% of the nation's energy should come from nuclear power. By 2100, it should be at 65%. Or something along those lines. Dramatic change is going to do more harm than good, but slow change and funding of the research of this matter (because it is incredibly important) should be priorities. The science isn't necessarily flawed, but the amount of data we currently have is inconclusive. Signs are pointing towards a change though, regardless of our impact, and we should prepare for that. And we should also stop playing with fire and try to slowly change the way we live.

hahahahhaha. Wednesday night, after moving furniture all day...I type short stories about global warming of course. I am not aware of who Plumm is, explain sir? I'd be screwed haha.

Just a couple of quick points (edited note: a quick couple of points was my original plan...major fail). First, we do have the power to impact the environment as a whole. Now, one person doing something doesn't make a damn difference obviously. But due to the vast amount of people in the world, and the growing amount of people that are now living in industrialized areas, there is an impact. I'm going to paint an imaginary scenario here. Let's say that up until 10 years ago, humans did not impact the environment in any way, shape, or form. The world was literally as it would be had we not been rapidly advancing in our technology. Obviously, this is unrealistic since we had had a solid 50+ years of cars being incredibly common, but bear with me here. So, it's 2002, and the environment is perfectly clean, no oil spills, no carbon monoxide from cars, no coal plants, etc...100% perfect. Let's look at just the United States for this exercise as well. And, we're going to steady the population at 300,000,000 people in the US, over the last 10 years. Now, the 2011 number for number of registered cars in the US is over 250,000,000, but for this exercise we'll go conservative, and take into account that not every car is driven daily, and say there are 200,000,000 cars driven daily. The average car emits 6 tons of CO2 per year into the atmosphere. That's 60 tons over 10 years. Multiply by 200,000,000, and you get 12 billion, or 12,000,000,000 tons of CO2 over 10 years, which equates to 24,000,000,000,000 (24 trillion!) pounds of CO2 being put into the atmosphere over the last 10 years by cars in the United States. 24 trillion pounds. Now going back to reality, humanity has obviously effected the environment before 2002, the United States isn't the only country in the world with cars, and cars aren't the only thing that makes an impact. You have to look at coal plants, oil spills, cars, planes, trains, boats, chemical factories, et cetera et cetera et cetera, in every country in the world, from the beginning of the industrial revolution. No big deal, one might say, we have trees that love CO2, and they'll balance it out by taking it in and spitting out more oxygen, thus balancing out the atmosphere. But, not only does it not exactly work that way, we're also cutting down 3-6 billion trees, or deforesting an area the size of Ireland, annually. Now the question is, how much does this effect the climate? That's what scientists are trying to figure out. Global warming is such a terrible term and most scientists hate the fact that it's referred to as this, but the correct term is Global Climate Change. The average air temperature is getting warmer, yes, but that doesn't mean hot winters and hot summers. The increase is so small that it doesn't necessarily effect the way the air would feel if we were to raise the temperature on any given day by that amount. But that isn't the issue. The ocean is getting warmer, resulting in a shift in currents, which is what drives climate patterns. Ever wonder why Finland is a lot warmer than northern Canada, despite their being the same distance from the equator? The gulf current is why, it brings warm air to Europe, which is why Europe is so much warmer that other areas around the world that are at the same distance from the equator. Currents are incredibly important to climate around the world, and when they shift even slightly it can result in drastic change. One of the biggest catalysts of a current shift can be rising sea levels, which are resulting due to melting ice caps. Basic science tells us that water expands as it freezes, and a large amount of the Earth's water is stored at both poles. When this ice melts, it goes back into the ocean, resulting in a rising sea level. So again, the question remains, how much is our behavior effecting the climate? I don't personally know that, no one knows definitively one way or the other. There is no question that we are effecting the atmosphere in some way, but the level of impact that will have is yet to be seen. The Earth goes through many climate shifts, we all know this and both sides use this as rhetoric. That isn't the issue. As a species we will adapt and survive, as long as something ridiculous doesn't happen, or we don't kill ourselves through stupidity. Obviously, we're in a period of global warming currently. Again, this doesn't mean hot winters and hot summers, this means a change in climate patterns. This could result in hotter then hell summers (like the one we're experiencing nationally right now, July 2012 was officially declared the hottest month on record in US history, going back to the late 1800's, the average temperature was 3.7 degrees higher than the average of July throughout the 20th century), freezing winters, desertification in new areas, different areas becoming frequent wetlands, or anything else you can think of. Now, again, I don't know, nor does anyone else, how much of an effect our pollution will have. I only focused on CO2, and that's not even the only problem. But, it will take years of scientific analysis to fully understand what impact humanity has. My personal opinion? I think that we are indeed in a natural warming pattern, but we are exacerbating it to at least some extent. How much, I do not know, but I think it's foolish to think that we aren't making an impact at all. The amount of extreme things that are happening in relation to weather and climate is just too much to ignore. We've experienced two ridiculously hot summers in a row now. The 2011 tornado season was the worst in history, and it wasn't even close, and 2012 has been both bad and unpredictable (near record highs in tornadoes some months, record lows in others). Hurricane season started unseasonably early this year. It snowed significantly in October in the northeast last year, which is incredibly rare. Even internationally there have been some crazy cataclysms over the past few years that have made people scratch their heads. We're in a period of change folks, like it or not. Real quick, I don't know how much of an effect we can have short term in trying to change our ways. As yyz28 said, nothing short of a complete overhaul in the way we live is going to be drastic enough to try to fix the way we are living, but I think that at least slow progress is a start. Hybrid cars eventually leading to electric cars, moving onto clean energy like nuclear and solar power, etc., can be great things. Sorry for the novel folks, there's a lot to say on this topic.

Amend it if necessary. Find a way to make things like this impossible. We changed the Constitution to avoid slavery, why not this? I definitely agree. But someone should find a way to close the loophole. At least I'm trying to solve the problem people! I definitely understand that, and I don't blame them. But, as long as they're in there, it's better than having them walk the streets free. It isn't a perfect world, and we'd like them to pay for their crimes, but I view prison as 50% punishment, 50% safety of the general public.

I definitely don't disagree with that. I think problem #1 is how our modern culture causes kids to have a negative outlook on education, but I agree that a lack of focus at home is a problem. I also view funding going to the wrong areas (superintendent salary...) as a major issues. Invest in the teachers, the kids will learn.

I can tell it again...

I should rephrase then. Throw out the use of the insanity plea as a valid point of innocence, and if one that would normally be found insane is found guilty, put their sentence on hold until they are deemed well enough to serve their sentence. In the mean time, put them in a mental hospital where they can get help.

Pancho Villa...that's classic. Also reminds me of my 10th grade history teacher who forgot every day that he had taught us the first lesson the day before and taught it again and again for 3 weeks, and Pancho Villa was in that lesson.

Glad to hear an insider's viewpoint and get some good information. Since the venue is going to be used for so much more, then maybe it will be a worthwhile investment.

My verbal response to this was both unsubtle and profane.

The thought just occurred to me that if the main poll is a "coaches poll" as it is in football, then we'd have a pretty damn good shot. If the coaches that are voting in the poll are the same coaches scared to death of playing us, we might have a better chance than you think. Can anyone confirm/deny the existence of a prominent coaches poll?

I honestly think our ceiling is probably a Butler-ish type of run through the NCAA tournament. I mean, any team can get really hot and win a few tough games, but we actually have the talent to make that happen. I'd run down the roster...but we all know what we have here. I think more realistic is to think 25 regular season wins, Sun Belt regular season champions, and an auto bid if we get upset in the conference tourney. I don't see that being too far fetched. But man...it's great to dream, and we have the kind of team that dreams are built on.

Is my response to this nonsense.