| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:26 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Old School wrote: | | mcgruff wrote: | | The usual mixture of pedantry and naivette. |
In other words: "I cannot refute his facts."  |
He also cannot refute the fact that climate science has done nothing but spawn new industries, new taxes and new fees. All it's done is give corporations more ways to take your cash and governments more ways to tax the hell out of you.
But, you know, it's too inconvenient to look at it for what it really is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Akkara wrote: | This issue has been so politicized that it is hard to tell what's what. It would not surprise me in the least if one day we learn that the major cause behind climate change is all this extraneous hot air injection by the politicos from both sides of the argument. If it were possible to get them to shut up for a week, there's a good chance the weather patterns would begin to stabilize.  |
No it's very easy to tell what's what. On the one hand you can choose to get your information about scientific matters from scientists. Science is the sum of all published papers which have not yet been refuted. That's it.
On the other hand, you could go to "think tanks" and blowhards in the blogosphere, ie front organisations for lobbying and PR - often the same organisations and the same people who actively supported tobacco industry denial of the health risks of smoking.
Does this sound like science to you?
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute
| Quote: | The Heartland Institute is a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as of 2010-2011.[2] It is a member of ALEC's Telecommunications and Information Technology Task Force,[3] Education Task Force,[4] Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development Task Force Financial Services Subcommittee[5] and Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force.[6] James Taylor, managing editor of the Heartland publication Environment & Climate News, spoke at the Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force meeting at the 2011 ALEC Annual Meeting.[6] Heartland was also an Exhibitor at ALEC's 2011 Annual Meeting.[7] Heartland has also functioned as a publisher and promoter of ALEC's model legislation.[8]
ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators the changes to the law they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve “model” bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) They fund almost all of ALEC's operations. Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations—without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills. ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a “unique,” “unparalleled” and “unmatched” organization. It might be right. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door. Learn more at ALECexposed.org. |
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yo, Sherlock. Turns out your source here was faked, by none other than Peter Gleik himself, and he has publicly confessed.
Asshat much?  
You're so brainwashed you actually believe it. You even very excitedly excerpted the most obviously forged part of the most obviously forged document. I could hear you fapping from way over here. (The bit about how the scientists of the Heartland Institute had as as a strategy the suppression of "prominent pro-climate scientists" and how they were planning to "stop teachers from teaching science".
What an ass-clown. And, now it's here on the Internet forever and ever.
Here's the kicker:
| Quote: | So who is Gleick? Some anonymous cyberhacker with a grudge against climate skeptics? Not quite. Gleick is a prominent environmental activist, head of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security in Oakland, Calif. He's also a former MacArthur Foundation "genius grant" recipient, and ... chair of the American Geophysical Union's Task Force on Scientific Ethics.
Yes, ethics. |
Here, read all about it. I suggest you read them all, so you are fully informed. It's a good example of what have been telling you about being "part of the problem" through your irrationality and blind, religion-like fanaticism; this guy has probably set back "the cause" another year or so, beyond the damage done by Climategate, beyond the damage done by An Inconvenient "Truth":
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-climate-20120225,0,3701177.story
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/23/fakegate_global_warmists_try_to_hide_their_decline_113225.html
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/global-warming-alarmists-resort-to-hoax.php
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/why-climate-skeptics-are-winning_631915.html
Bwaaaa-ha-ha-haaaa! Classic climate change religionism.
Teh Scyents!!1!!
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
He may have faked it, but only because the unwashed masses are too stupid to believe it on their own. The Truth™ must prevail.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big dave
n00b
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wtf is this *gate naming bullshit? it was called watergate because it was the watergate hotel, which is located on the potomac where a "water gate" used to be. liargate? fakegate? they're not even trying anymore. I'm going to start a scandal at the US-Mexico border, and call it GateGate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| big dave wrote: | | wtf is this *gate naming bullshit? it was called watergate because it was the watergate hotel, which is located on the potomac where a "water gate" used to be. liargate? fakegate? they're not even trying anymore. I'm going to start a scandal at the US-Mexico border, and call it GateGate. |
Welcome to Idiocracy.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | Asshat much? |
The papers were not faked. The single memo - which you have confused with the entire series of leaked documents - may not have been an official Hateland document but even then it did accurately summarise some of their activities as you can see from the uncontested, genuine documents. Gleick should be commended for shedding some light on an organisation which only exists to promote corporate interests in their battle against regulation. Are pesky scientists complaining about smoking deaths? Problems with the side effects of fracking? Climate denial threatening your fossil fuel interests? Yep: Hateland is the place to go if you want to buy the services of trash-talking blowhards who will gladly launch an attack on any scientific findings which interfere with your business.
You'd maybe know that if you ever looked beyond your pathetic list of biased "news sources". Asshat much?
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
What's the difference between an alarmist and the Taliban?
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big dave
n00b
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | The single memo - which you have confused with the entire series of leaked documents - may not have been an official Hateland document but even then it did accurately summarise some of their activities as you can see from the uncontested, genuine documents. Gleick should be commended for shedding some light on an organisation which only exists to promote corporate interests in their battle against regulation. |
hahahahahahah
haahhahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
there's no way that's a serious account. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| big dave wrote: | | mcgruff wrote: | | The single memo - which you have confused with the entire series of leaked documents - may not have been an official Hateland document but even then it did accurately summarise some of their activities as you can see from the uncontested, genuine documents. Gleick should be commended for shedding some light on an organisation which only exists to promote corporate interests in their battle against regulation. |
hahahahahahah
haahhahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
there's no way that's a serious account. |
Isn't delusional denialism a wonderful thing to gawk at? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| section12 wrote: | | big dave wrote: | hahahahahahah
haahhahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
there's no way that's a serious account. |
Isn't delusional denialism a wonderful thing to gawk at? |
Yup, even when their corporate climate denial machine is exposed for the fraud that it is, they still cling onto their 'not my fault' delusion.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | Asshat much? |
The papers were not faked. The single memo - which you have confused with the entire series of leaked documents - may not have been an official Hateland document but even then it did accurately summarise some of their activities as you can see from the uncontested, genuine documents. Gleick should be commended for shedding some light on an organisation which only exists to promote corporate interests in their battle against regulation. Are pesky scientists complaining about smoking deaths? Problems with the side effects of fracking? Climate denial threatening your fossil fuel interests? Yep: Hateland is the place to go if you want to buy the services of trash-talking blowhards who will gladly launch an attack on any scientific findings which interfere with your business.
You'd maybe know that if you ever looked beyond your pathetic list of biased "news sources". Asshat much? |
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, baby. The document was obviously faked, and you should have suspected that when you posted it, but you are so incredibly brainwashed that you saw those ridiculous statements as being completely consistent with your warped perception of reality.
Now, even in the face a general consensus that the document is an obvious forgery (the Chicago Tribune is not a right-wing, "anti-climate" publication, by the way), you still can't resist trying to defend it, acting like even more of an ass-hat.
This is classic mcgruff right here. From this point forward, gullibly falling for an obviously biased lie or hoax due to one's own brainwashing, and then emphatically re-broadcasting it with an ebullient air of triumph or strident outrage, shall be known as "pulling a mcgruff".
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wswartzendruber
Veteran
Joined: 23 Mar 2004
Posts: 1197
Location: Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | This is classic mcgruff right here. From this point forward, gullibly falling for an obviously biased lie or hoax due to one's own brainwashing, and then emphatically re-broadcasting it with an ebullient air of triumph or strident outrage, shall be known as "pulling a mcgruff". |
* Puts uniform back on. *
Attention to orders! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | The papers were not faked. The single memo - which you have confused with the entire series of leaked documents - may not have been an official Hateland document but even then it did accurately summarise some of their activities as you can see from the uncontested, genuine documents. |
Read. Ponder. Understand. The summary memo may not be an official Hateland document but nobody is denying that the rest - the important ones - are not genuine. They were sent to Gleick directly by Hateland itself.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: |
Read. Ponder. Understand. The summary memo may not be an official Hateland document but nobody is denying that the rest - the important ones - are not genuine. They were sent to Gleick directly by Hateland itself. |
So forgery, stealing and identity theft are perfectly fine so long as the organization having it done to them is evil in your eyes?
i c wut u did thar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aidanjt
Veteran
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1101
Location: Rep. of Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| section12 wrote: | | So forgery, stealing and identity theft are perfectly fine so long as the organization having it done to them is evil in your eyes? |
No, simply that authoring a summery of the document collection doesn't eliminate the evidence of the collection demonstrating wrongdoing of an organisation simply because they didn't author the summery. And it's funny how denialists didn't seem too bothered with identity theft and stealing when they got a treasure trove of East Anglia emails to quote out of context. Not saying two wrongs make a right, just be careful up there on your pedestal, it looks a mite shaky.
_________________
| juniper wrote: | | you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aidanjt wrote: |
No, simply that authoring a summery of the document collection doesn't eliminate the evidence of the collection demonstrating wrongdoing of an organisation simply because they didn't author the summery. And it's funny how denialists didn't seem too bothered with identity theft and stealing when they got a treasure trove of East Anglia emails to quote out of context. Not saying two wrongs make a right, just be careful up there on your pedestal, it looks a mite shaky. |
Yeah, they were quoted out of context a bit. However, some of it was very disturbing... like the emails saying how they wanted to disallow the sharing of their models and data and methods of collecting the data from other scientists. How they wanted to deny access to data so that they could not be refuted on any level. They are not completely innocent in that scandal.
And what is the big deal? We KNOW the group, if you just read their site, has an agenda AGAINST "global warming" in every way, shape and form. It's not like pro-warming kool-aid drinkers don't have their very own lobby to raise money and influence politicians/outcomes of their own. They are just seen as "innocent" and "right" in the whole matter and, thusly, cannot be evil simply because you (general statement, not you in particular) believe in them.
It is NOT a shock that Heartland Institute wants to remove global warming hypocrisy and lies from schools and other places. In fact, global warming is taught in schools as a HARD FACT that man is the cause, yet their [pro-warmers] loose "evidence" constantly contradicts** itself on a weekly basis. That alone means it should only be taught as a possible THEORY on why the globe is warming, or maybe it should even simply be a hypothesis.
So until good, solid, indisputable facts can be pinned to man causing global warming, I think BOTH sides should just shut up about it.
** | TFA wrote: |
These results are significant as until now projections of the possible effects of predicted climate change have assumed that droughts and heat waves would always have an effect on ecosystems - and that in turn would lead on to carbon level changes leading to more temperature rises and so on. These assumptions may now have to be revisited.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aidanjt wrote: | | section12 wrote: | | So forgery, stealing and identity theft are perfectly fine so long as the organization having it done to them is evil in your eyes? |
No, simply that authoring a summery of the document collection doesn't eliminate the evidence of the collection demonstrating wrongdoing of an organisation simply because they didn't author the summery. And it's funny how denialists didn't seem too bothered with identity theft and stealing when they got a treasure trove of East Anglia emails to quote out of context. Not saying two wrongs make a right, just be careful up there on your pedestal, it looks a mite shaky. |
But the real documents don't reveal anything of any interest. Only the forged one did (the one mcgruff was fapping to), and it wasn't a "summary of the documents"; it was a strategy document. The real ones were just included to lend credence to the forged one. As to East Anglia emails, nobody had to take one and alter it to make it incriminating. Yeah, ridiculous forgeries are teh Scyents!!!1!! Are you pulling a mcgruff too? 
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | But the real documents don't reveal anything of any interest. Only the forged one did (the one mcgruff was fapping to), and it wasn't a "summary of the documents"; it was a strategy document. The real ones were just included to lend credence to the forged one. As to East Anglia emails, nobody had to take one and alter it to make it incriminating. Yeah, ridiculous forgeries are teh Scyents!!!1!! Are you pulling a mcgruff too? |
You will have to excuse mcgruff as the faked document and the uninteresting accompanying papers all constitute an "I told you so" victory for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| section12 wrote: | | Yeah, they were quoted out of context a bit. However, some of it was very disturbing... like the emails saying how they wanted to disallow the sharing of their models and data and methods of collecting the data from other scientists. How they wanted to deny access to data so that they could not be refuted on any level. They are not completely innocent in that scandal. |
That's complete and utter bullshit. The scientists' work was published in scientific journals. That's some way to hide.
Also, anyone who wanted could get the data from the original sources. It wasn't difficult. Note that the UEA guys weren't allowed to pass some of it on to third parties.
So, we find a paid attack-dog (McUntyre) abusing FOI procedures to make pointless requests for information which the UEA couldn't comply with even if they wanted to. His actions were deliberate provocation and harassment and were quite correctly viewed as such. If McUntyre was a real scientist, he could have got the data just like everybody else and done his own research. The fact that he did not is very revealing. It is no surprise that the UEA guys got pissed off and I don't blame them in the slightest. If I'd been working there I'd have told him to fuck off too.
| section12 wrote: | | And what is the big deal? We KNOW the group, if you just read their site, has an agenda AGAINST "global warming" in every way, shape and form. It's not like pro-warming kool-aid drinkers don't have their very own lobby to raise money and influence politicians/outcomes of their own. They are just seen as "innocent" and "right" in the whole matter and, thusly, cannot be evil simply because you (general statement, not you in particular) believe in them. |
[SPANK!]
You're a very naughty boy. What is the big deal...?! One side is doing science: you know (or maybe don't) that thing they do to find out about the natural world through logic, evidence and reason. The other side is paid to attack science by a group of individuals and corporations wealthy enough to hire a small army of blowhards to challenge any inconvenient scientific findings which might harm their business interests.
See the problem?
| section12 wrote: | | It is NOT a shock that Heartland Institute wants to remove global warming hypocrisy and lies from schools and other places. In fact, global warming is taught in schools as a HARD FACT that man is the cause, yet their [pro-warmers] loose "evidence" constantly contradicts** itself on a weekly basis. That alone means it should only be taught as a possible THEORY on why the globe is warming, or maybe it should even simply be a hypothesis. |
You appear incapable of understanding the implications of the grasslands research. I realise I am grappling with some basic conceptual inadequacy here, but let me remind you I've already told you that some models don't include the effects of vegetation so they will not be affected. Others, which do, may need to make some minor adjustments. Woop-de-do.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Big fat red herring stuffed with strawmen, but nobody's going to be distracted by it.
The bottom line here is that the crap you created this thread to rant about, and most specifically the particular document that you fapped over so hard you shat yourself, was faked, and you made a complete ass of yourself.
Now, you're just rolling in it.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
section12
n00b
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 20
Location: /dev/null
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | Big fat red herring stuffed with strawmen, but nobody's going to be distracted by it.
The bottom line here is that the crap you created this thread to rant about, and most specifically the particular document that you fapped over so hard you shat yourself, was faked, and you made a complete ass of yourself.
Now, you're just rolling in it. |
He sure is a testy one, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | But the real documents don't reveal anything of any interest. |
It's usually better not to launch into a self-congratulatory rant if you don't know WTF you're talking about. From one of the documents which don't reveal anything of interest:
| Quote: | H. Global Warming Curriculum for K-12 Schools
Many people lament the absence of educational material suitable for K-12 students on global
warming that isn’t alarmist or overtly political. Heartland has tried to make material available to
teachers, but has had only limited success. Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the
alarmist perspective. Moreover, material for classroom use must be carefully written to meet
curriculum guidelines, and the amount of time teachers have for supplemental material is
steadily shrinking due to the spread of standardized tests in K-12 education. |
A PR group deliberately trying to stop kids learning science in schools. That's shocking and unforgivable.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmitchell
Veteran
Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1154
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mcgruff wrote: | | A PR group deliberately trying to stop kids learning science in schools. That's shocking and unforgivable. |
Your reading of the quoted paragraph is shocking and unforgivable. Stop kids from learning science? Could you possibly be more shrill? More hysterical?
_________________
Your argument is invalid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Could you possibly be more ignorant? I hardly know where to begin.
Ignorant of climate science, of course, otherwise you'd know how ridiculous it is to try to classify it as "alarmism".
Ignorant of the importance of a good scientific education in the success of a modern, industrial economy and in enabling its citizens to make good political decisions about which policies to support.
Ignorant of how a proper science curriculum should be formed. Hint: leaving it to PR groups who are paid to spread scientific misinformation is probably not a good idea.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
