Bishop Hill Oreskes and Conway do the end of the world
Apr 29, 2013 Climate: Sceptics Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway have penned a rather strange article in Daedalus, the journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Science fiction writers construct an imaginary future; historians attempt to reconstruct the past. Ultimately, both are seeking to understand the present. In this essay, we blend the two genres to imagine a future historian looking back on a past that is our present and (possible) future. The occasion is the tercentenary of the end of Western culture (1540–2073); the dilemma being addressed is how we–the children of the Enlightenment–failed to act on robust information about climate change and knowledge of the damaging events that were about to unfold. Our historian concludes that a second Dark Age had fallen on Western civilization, in which denial and self-deception, rooted in an ideological fixation on “free” markets, disabled the world’s powerful nations in the face of tragedy. Moreover, the scientists who best understood the problem were hamstrung by their own cultural practices, which demanded an excessively stringent standard for accepting claims of any kind–even those involving imminent threats. Here, our future historian, living in the Second People’s Republic of China, recounts the events of the Period of the Penumbra (1988–2073) that led to the Great Collapse and Mass Migration (2074).
The sci-fi bit is just millenarian mumbo jumbo of course, but I was amused by some of the more historically oriented stuff.
The year 2009 is viewed as the “last best chance” the Western world had to save itself, as leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark, to try, for the fifteenth time since the UNFCCC was written, to agree on a binding, international law to prevent disruptive climate change. Two years before, scientists involved in the IPCC had declared anthropogenic warming to be “unequivocal,” and public opinion polls showed that a majority of people–even in the recalcitrant United States–believed that action was warranted. But shortly before the meeting, a massive campaign (funded primarily by fossil fuel corporations, whose annual profits at that time exceeded the GDPs of most countries6), was launched to discredit the scientists whose research underpinned the IPCC’s conclusion.7 Public support for action evaporated; even the president of the United States felt unable to move his nation forward.
The references given are:
6 At the time, most countries still used the archaic concept of a gross domestic product, a measure of consumption, rather than the Bhutanian concept of gross domestic happiness to evaluate well-being in a state.
7 http://unfccc.int/meetings/copenhagen_dec_2009/meeting/6295.php [This is just the COP15 home page].
It's extraordinary how this "massive campaign" by fossil fuel interests has gone almost entirely undocumented. There is, to the best of my knowledge, virtually no evidence to support the claim at all. It is something of an indictment of the standards in academia that this kind of conspiracy theorising goes unremarked and entirely unchallenged.
Reader Comments (97)
These are just children who have written an essay on their summer holidays with the wild unicorns of Xanadu. The unicorns told them that the earth is dying and only they can save it. Enid Blyton is actually an ascended master and they must channel her infinite wisdom. They had squash and cherry pie for lunch
Salamano:
Looks like a Muckety map to me. You drop names and relationships in, real, highly tenuous or imagined and produce your own on-line:
http://news.muckety.com/
“What the Grateful Dead and Dr. Rajendra Pachauri Have in Common - A rapt audience”
It's a little while since the Dead had a rapt, or even live, audience.
"It's extraordinary how this "massive campaign" by fossil fuel interests has gone almost entirely undocumented. There is, to the best of my knowledge, virtually no evidence to support the claim at all."
This just shows how skilfully my campaigns have been conducted.
DaveB, you say
"...no-one has produced a shred of evidence (least of all James Delingpole, who even wrote a book on the topic) to support the notion that the AGW hypothesis evolved as some sort of "leftist" displacement activity following the collapse of the Soviet Union but the notion is aired time and again here and elsewhere."
I think that this notion comes mainly from Patrick Moore:
http://www.beattystreetpublishing.com/xcerpt-from-confessions-of-a-greenpeace-dropout/
"The collapse of world communism and the fall of the Berlin Wall during the 1980s added to the trend toward extremism. The Cold War was over and the peace movement was largely disbanded. The peace movement had been mainly Western-based and anti-American in its leanings. Many of its members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their neo-Marxist, far-left agendas. To a considerable extent the environmental movement was hijacked by political and social activists who learned to use green language to cloak agendas that had more to do with anticapitalism and antiglobalization than with science or ecology. I remember visiting our Toronto office in 1985 and being surprised at how many of the new recruits were sporting army fatigues and red berets in support of the Sandinistas.
I don’t blame them for seizing the opportunity. There was a lot of power in our movement and they saw how it could be turned to serve their agendas of revolutionary change and class struggle. But I differed with them because they were extremists who confused the issues and the public about the nature of our environment and our place in it. To this day they use the word industry as if it were a swear word. The same goes for multinational, chemical, genetic, corporate, globalization, and a host of other perfectly useful terms. Their propaganda campaign is aimed at promoting an ideology that I believe would be extremely damaging to both civilization and the environment."
Another thing which supports the "watermelons" theory is the fact that so many of the purported solutions to CAGW like banning the private car, communal living, state control etc. are the same goals that the extreme left was already promoting as a political philosophy before the wall came down and it became more plainly apparent just how unpleasant the results were.
They used to promote their ideology as a better way of life, now they promote it as the only way to avert a supposed catastrophe.
“What the Grateful Dead and Dr. Rajendra Pachauri Have in Common"
A carbon footprint as big as Bono's (28 years of almost continuous touring with several truckloads of equipment)
A trail of premature deaths, from substance abuse on the one hand and fuel poverty on the other.
DaveB, you say
"...no-one has produced a shred of evidence (least of all James Delingpole, who even wrote a book on the topic) to support the notion that the AGW hypothesis evolved as some sort of "leftist" displacement activity following the collapse of the Soviet Union but the notion is aired time and again here and elsewhere."
I don't believe it did, "evolve as some sort of "leftist" displacement activity following the collapse of the Soviet Union...", that is. It seems to have been pretty much the brain child of Hansen, but it does provide the weapons by which the environmental movement can get control of our lives. The environmental movement is largely left wing and was before the AGW scare came about, what they openly espoused, even before the AGW thing was the dismantling of western industrial civilisation, the destruction of consumerism and world government. CAGW was an ideal platform from which they could launch their world dominance, and they grabbed it with both hands.
I suggest you take a look at the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, FoE, WWF web sites. Look up the Club of Rome and Agenda 21 and Maurice Strong, it's all there, not hidden at all, they're trying to put a world government in place so they can save the environment and force green lifestyles on us all. It's an anti-human religion.
Slightly off-topic, but the big Green plan for the future isn't to turn off your appliances remotely, it's to ration energy usage that's what smart meters are for.
Has the paper by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway been published in time to be cited in the next IPCC Report or will they have to wait a few years for AR6, assuming that the world has not ended by then?
Concerning the idea that we should all be FORCED to be happy in the Green State, readers of this blog may be interested in a conversation I have been having for a week now with a Warmist on the Economist.
It's just here - join in if you want
The relevant quote is:
...It is actually a scientific fact that more money does not lead to more happiness, at least not over long. The threshhold after which a country's overall happiness does not rise substantially anymore with an increase of GDP/capita lies around 15'000$ (1995 PPP, source Worldwatch institute). Above that, After some time, people get used to their salary raise and their happiness returns to normal or even below that, because they might have more work and less time to spend on the things that actually matter. ...... In order to achieve the magnitude of change within time, convincing and regulatory force will be needed. The past 25 years have shown that voluntary approaches do not work, as they will lead to relative decoupling of wealth from resource use, but not to absolute decoupling which, eventually, is the only thing that counts....
That is an authentic warmist thought....
zed: Conspiracy nutters? Like RFK, who believes that his uncle, JFK, was killed by multiple shooters? And who also opposes a windfarm off his vacation mansion, but thats another story.
DaleC:
I think that this notion comes mainly from Patrick Moore
Thanks for your helpful reply - I'd forgotten Moore's comments. I have yet to read the book you cite but he has made similar points elsewhere. Whatever, the quote strikes me as particularly silly.
1. He writes, "The collapse of world communism and the fall of the Berlin Wall during the 1980s added to the trend toward extremism".
The Berlin Wall was demolished politically in 1989 and physically in 1990 - "during the 1980s" is thus misleading, if not downright wrong.
The AGW issue had been rumbling away in milieux such as The Club of Rome since the early 1970s. By 1979, the WMO's First World Climate Conference called on world governments "to foresee and prevent potential man-made changes in climate that might be adverse to the well-being of humanity" and endorsed plans to establish a World Climate Research Program. The WCRP was set up in 1981.
2. Key events that immediately preceded the GDR's collapse included the UNEP/WMO Villach conference of 1985, the WMO's Tenth Congress and the passing of the US Climate Protection Act in 1987. The Toronto Conference (Our Changing Atmosphere), James Hansen's notorious Stunt at the Senate, Margaret Thatcher's equally notorious (though slightly more circumspect) speech to the Royal Society and an EEC Communication, The Greenhouse Issue and the Community (COM [88] 656 Final) which formally notified the Council of Ministers of the "scientific basis" [their phrase, not mine] of the climate problem, all took place in 1988.
Despite Moore's meanderings, none of these shindigs was noticed by, let alone influenced by, anyone on the "neo-Marxist" left. It is clear that sections of it sought later to clutch at AGW's apron strings and (shamefully - Worstall's book is good on this) to claim its agenda as its own but the notion that AGW was left-wing in origin simply does not accord with the facts.
3. "The peace movement had been mainly Western-based . . . many of its members moved into the environmental movement, bringing with them their neo-Marxist, far-left agendas. . . . I remember visiting our Toronto office in 1985 and being surprised at how many of the new recruits were sporting army fatigues and red berets in support of the Sandinistas".
Oh, Dear. No-one in the peace movement has ever worn red berets and army fatigues - "peaceniks" do not, by definition, play soldiers. The notion that they entertain "neo-Marxist" ideas is IMHO politically illiterate and extrapolation from a trip to an office to a "history" of GW is banal. But it's an important debate . . .
Geronimo's point merits an answer but I've only just seen it. Later, hopefully.
geezer: there is a solid statstical link between GDP and national happiness.
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/wealth-and-well-being.html
Feel free to use this in your discussion.
This story reads like a "Communist Manifesto". I'd bet they could model the probability of this fictional story actually happening...98% of Paleohistorians agree.
Sounds to me like Oreskes and Conway are merely positioning themselves to get recognition from the Royal Society, and thus substance and substantiation will be way down their list of priorities.
Oh brave new world that has such people in't
(I was at The Globe on Friday - really good Tempest).
@Les Johnson
"geezer: there is a solid statstical link between GDP and national happiness...."
Thank you for that helpful cite. For this assistance, I pray that your shadow may always be jointed at the elbows....
I have always considered 1540 to be about 40 minutes past G&T time. However, on a lighter note, here is some work by the aforementioned illustrious Prof. Lew, with his idea about how to prove a sad “denialist”. It was odd, though, that much of it seemed to fit better for the AGWists, as I noted:
• Nefarious Intent: Assuming that the presumed conspirators have nefarious intentions. For example, if person X assumes that blogger Y colluded with the New York Times to publish a paper damaging to X, then X presumes nefarious intent on the part of Y. (“You only want the data so you can prove me wrong!”)
• Persecuted Victim: Self-identifying as the victim of an organised persecution. (“You only want the data so you can prove me wrong!”)
• Nihilistic Skepticism: Refusing to believe anything that doesn’t fit into the conspiracy theory. Note that “conspiracy theory” here is a fairly broad term and need not involve a global conspiracy (e.g., that NASA faked the moon landing) but can refer to small-scale events and hypotheses. (“The 16 years of no temperature increase is only a pause.” Mind you, this can be trumped by: “There is no pause in increasing temperatures!”)
• Nothing occurs by Accident: Weaving any small random event into the conspiracy narrative. (“Hurricane Sandy proves us right!”)
• Something Must be Wrong: Switching liberally between different, even contradictory conspiracy theories that have in common only the presumption that there is something wrong in the official account by the alleged conspirators. Thus, people may simultaneously believe that Princess Diana faked her own death and that she was assassinated by MI5. (Thus, people may believe that the increasingly severe winters and cool summers are a result of warming.)
• Self-Sealing reasoning: Interpreting any evidence against the conspiracy as evidence for the conspiracy. For example, when climate scientists are exonerated of any wrong-doing 9 times over by different investigations, this is reinterpreted to imply that the climate-change conspiracy involves not just the world’s climate scientists but also the investigating bodies and associated governments. (“All this snow is caused by heat.”)
While I may have brought this to your attention before, this is the best example I know of being hoist by your own petard.
Their discription of the most credulous "scientists" ever, accepting the most unfounded claims of danger, based on consistently contra-indicated speculation: "the scientists who best understood the problem were hamstrung by their own cultural practices, which demanded an excessively stringent standard for accepting claims of any kind–even those involving imminent threats."
Who gets to decide whether society attempts to optimize GDP or "Bhutanian domestic happiness"?
Where's Carl Pilkington when you need him?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lRIQGU2RRk
Stay tuned, friends, I have been blessed with an opportunity to be busy very soon (à la Donna Laframboise) when it comes to dissecting the accusation that skeptics are fossil fuel industry shills.
Not only is there no evidence to support the accusation, the accusation itself falls apart under hard scrutiny from every angle you look at. The accusation is plagued with irreconcilable narratives, one person's claims are inexplicably contradicted by another's, the people associated with the accusation gather in rather small circles, and the main premise of the accusation stems from one central place and time, consolidated out of a narrative that was getting nowhere from '91 to '95-ish. I briefly touched on that in a February guest post at Tallbloke's blog, but I will go into far greater depth on that next month.
DaveB -
Uh, yeah, sure.
Please explain how the East Bloc was weakened to the point that all the dominoes fell with so little force and so little reaction?
It's reasonable, if incomplete, to say that the "collapse of world communism" took place during the '80s, and that the fall of the wall and the lanterning of Ceausescu and so forth were the end product of the process.
"Geronimo's point merits an answer but I've only just seen it. Later, hopefully."
What point are you talking about? I regard the environmental movement the greatest enemy of humans, and that they will do anything, other than put themselves and their policies to the people in an election, to gain control of our lives for the good of the planet. I didn't make that up, I read their writings. The move to renewable energy at whatever cost, or misery, is actively supported by the environmental movement, many of whom see this as an opportunity to redistribute wealth. I'm not making anything up, it's in their literature.
I doubt you've got an answer to the words from their own mouths, so I'm wondering what point you've found you can answer, don't address it to me, address it to the environmentalists who I've referenced.
As noted in the post, footnote 6 hardly backs the claim on p. 42 of this mind-numbing article, to the effect that coal, oil, and natural gas interests spent untold millions, if not billions, in 2009 to discredit Michael Mann an crew.
There's not a whole lot more even pretending to support Oreskes and Conway's assertions about the fossil-fuel funding behind it all.
Note 15 cites their book Merchants of Doubt and two articles by McCright and Dunlap. Note 35 just re-cites Oreskes and Conway's book.
Note 36 slams a March 2012 article in the New York Times for quoting Myron Ebell of the Competititive Enterprise Institute, "a think tank that was heavily funded by the carbon-combustion complex."
So how much was the CEI getting from fossil fuel corporations in 2012?
On money and happiness.......I think this may have come from Percy Barnevik:
" Money may not make you happy but it's much nicer to cry in a Mercedes than on a bike".
Interesting the fall of communism signaled by the collapse of the Berlin Wall comes up in this discussion. I have in blogs across the world been refering to the "Berlin Wall of climate alarmism/ climate denial". Articles such as this Oreskes/ Conway piece are but more cracks in the facade of global warming. The more desperate they get the more of this sort of junk will appear. The amount of junk is a barameter of when the facade collapses completely.
MikeH:
Did anyone else like the bit on p44 where the 95% statistical significance standard is revealed to be a form of religious asceticism?
They ought to cut that bit out and post it to all the world's scientific organisations, with a note to say "We think we've spotted what you're doing wrong. Best regards, from the History dept."
Woah just finished it.
It seems Oreskes is really expanding a theme about scientists not understanding the true state of the world’s calamity. You can’t ask for a better de facto “anti-science” manifesto. They basically show that they really seem to be anti-science.
I am not objecting to that position per se, if there is reasoned or entertaining explanation or narrative, but this screed is purely wish fulfillment fantasy of the most drear and creepy kind.
I like that last one where there is a clear implication that withholding of state funding for artists is supposedly a deliberate tactic to punish their climate prescience – a totally bug-nuts crazy conspiracy theory ideation if ever I heard one!
Also like how they pull out a “fortuitous shift in Earth’s orbit” to suit their narrative along with an apparent claim that AIDS somehow increases in association with insect infestations:
This stuff is all astonishing piffle, it has a vaguely sinister whiny impotent undertone that genuinely reminds me of the fantasies of the Unabomber.
stan stendera: Agreed. The junk increases because it's the only way to hold an increasingly ramshackle wall together. The IPCC's AR5 is a key moment, with Nic Lewis now acting as some kind of conscience in a central part of the narrative. As decent people go back to the empirical evidence the cracks will be impossible to hide. May the fall resound far.
Just because Arthur C Clarke got a couple of things right about satellites, people think all SciFi writers prophets! Sorry, the vast majority of 50's and 60's SciFi (and I have read a lot) is so badly wide of the mark as to be classed as fantasy. Utopian in its science (where is my flying car?) and dystopian in society (Big Brother is still not a patch on what he was supposed to be by now - or 1989 even), it reflected the society of its day not the society of today.
It is, however, just the kind of thing I expect from Oreske - projecting her particular predjudices onto everyone and everything she sees.
Planet of the Apes stuff. Desperate stuf.
Oreskes and Conway know what they are doing. There is no doubt about if you read their book "Merchants of Doubt" which is full of hate and distorted history. They were particularly vicious with their ad hominem attacks against three scientists, all of whom turned out to be dead and unable to answer their drivel. They also have an in with the editors of Nature who published an illustrated two-page advertisement for their book. When I sent a letter to the editors they found a reason for not accepting it. Their latest science fantasy/fiction follows the Merchants of Doubt as a new attack against all those opposed to the cult of carbon they have sworn allegiance to.
When fact and fiction become so difficult to distinguish in your profession, it's easy to see how the authors say "what the hell" and produce garbage like this. I just wish it were better written.
"Mass migration of undernourished and dehydrated individuals"
I gather that neither Conway or Oreskes have ever been dehydrated, much less undernourished if the imagine that people start migrating en masse in that state.
The most charitable view of Oreskes is that she went to Australia as a geology grad student and returned as Helen Caldicott's understudy. No wonder she ended up as a Vice Presidential court historian.
@ DaveB
Could you please provide a citation?
Otherwise your comment will be the foundation stone of generations of claims in the blogosphere alleging 'even the deniers admit it.'
I confess I haven't heard the claim you make, and suspect you're confusing it with the report James Delingpole debunks in 'Watermelons'.
My favorite passage in Oreskes and Conway has to be this one, from page 43:
They're apocalyptically projecting a 5 meter (17 foot) rise in sea level.
This, apparently, will be enough to submerge Charlotte, Boone, Sparta, Asheville, Highlands, and Mars Hill—and the Great Smokies, all the way to the Tennessee line.
What an amazingly witless article.
Look up the Club of Rome and Agenda 21 and Maurice Strong, it's all there, not hidden at all,
Not hidden, true, but also not left-wing.
Maurice Strong was an oil entrepreneur, for goodness sake. And a bent one too, judging by his behaviour with Iraq in the UN.
The Club of Rome is not a hippie organisation, with the likes of Queen Beatrix and Pierre Trudeau. Amusingly, two famous members, Vaclav Havel and Mikhail Gorbachev are synonymous with the dismantling of centralised left government.
Agenda 21 is a UN document. Most of the countries signing were not left-wing.
The point is that while environmentalism is friendly to left-leaning concerns, and is often used as a cover for them, that is not all it is. Previously it existed largely in the conservative right. The founders of WWF are a roll call of the fabulous wealthy elite, like the Sierra Club.
I would argue that modern political parties like indulging in a bit of green-washing precisely because it is not under-pinned by any left-right or conservative-liberal or authoritarian-libertarian consensus. Thus it can be all things to all people. A person who is damned near fascist can feel that they really are a good person because they believe in "green" things. (A particular British prince springs to mind.)
Mooloo, you certainly make some solid points. But the fact remains that when Communism pretty much collapsed as a viable option in the West, many of its most experienced activists moved into various environmental groups and political parties full time. Many of them already had a presence there, in line with the classic infiltration technique.
I was around when the environmental movement started taking off in the early 1970s. It was originally mostly well-meaning middle class people and hippies back then. Then, so-called "anarcho-syndicalists" with Communist and union connections started to get involved in the mid 70s, forming links with community groups for "green bans" on unpopular development proposals (this was in Australia).
Things have moved a long way since then, and we now have a Greens Senator - Lee Rhiannon - whose parents were lifelong Communists, mostly of the Stalinist persuasion, and who edited the Stalinist newsletter until it finally folded for lack of interest in the 80s. The Greens are split between the hard Leftists like Rhiannon and the old style nature-theists, although there is not much to choose between them on many issues. Both have an authoritarian streak.
It's a confluence of interests, not a conspiracy. But, it is no less real for that.
Idąc tym tropem i będąc konsekwentnym, Kościół za chwilę powinien zażądać stworzenia sieci szkół, gdzie nie mówiłoby się uczniom o ewolucji, a jedynie o kreacjonizmie itd.”
Rozczarował mnie Pan… przecież Kościół uznaje ewolucję i NIE naucza kreacjonizmu… Po co zabierać się za komentowanie, jeżeli nie zna się podstawowych faktów?
Buat kamu pemeran pendatang baru tentu terdengar asing dengan game casino online, tetapi tidak dengan player handal. Player profesional menyangka kalau login casino online merupakan perihal terbaik yang dapat dikerjakannya. Tidaklah tanpa alibi, melainkan casino online senantiasa sediakan seluruh kelebihan serta profit tanpa dibanding- bandingkan. Untuk kamu yang sedang bingung hal "live casino" ini, perhatikanlah keterangan yang hendak kita bahas dengan komplit.
Jika kamu bingung memilih situs judi yang terbaik dan terpercaya dimana di jaman sekarang kamu bisa memilih permainan judi online apa saja akan tetapi yang terpercaya dan sudah berlisensi itu jarang. Situs Capsun Online ini situs judi paling terbaik dan terpercaya se indonesia dimana situs ini sudah mempunyai izin/lisensi. Dari berbagai game judi online yang ada di indonesia situs Resmi judi Capsun Online ini yang paling banyak digemari dan dimainkan oleh kebanyakan orang. Tidak sedikit orang yang sudah bergabung dan juga tak hanya itu mereka sudah meraih keuntungan yang sangat luar biasa dari game judi Capsun Online ini.
Sebagai situs casino online 389Sports yang terbaik di indonesia, tentunya sudah memiliki beragam wahana permainan judi online dari berbagai provider terkenal di seluruh dunia. Dari setiap jenis permainan judi online yang ada 389Sports permainan-permainan yang sangatlah umum banyak disukai para bettor dan banyak dimainkan di dalam agen judi terbaik. Kamu bisa memainkan pilihan judi online yang ada di 389Sports seperti Live Casino Online, Judi Bola Online, Slot Online, Poker Online, dan masih banyak slot judi online yang kamu bisa mainkan di 389Sports termasuk situs casino online ini sendiri. Untuk mengakses itu semua kamu di perlukan cuma dengan satu ID saja kamu bisa memainkan semua judi online yang ada di 389Sports tanpa harus daftar akun ID lagi sangat mudah bukan. Kamu bisa langsung memainkan dan deposit minimal 20k sangat minim sekali tentunya kamu bisa menggunakan Semua jenis Bank lokal, dan tentunya kamu juga bisa menggunakan E-wallet seperti Ovo, Gopay, dan Dana. Ada juga kamu bisa menggunakan Pulsa Telkomsel/XL. Dengan modal minim 20k kamu bisa mendapatkan hadiah jackpot ratusan juta dari situs casino online 389Sports ini. Kamu juga akan mendapatkan pelayanan yang sangat terbaik selama 24 jam non stop tanpa henti sehingga mampu menjawab semua pertanyaan yang kamu tanyakan kapanpun dengan sangat cepat. Untuk berteransaksipun sangatlah cepat kamu tidak perlu menunggu belasan menit kurang dari waktu 5 menit saldo witdraw/deposit akan langsung masuk ke akun kalian. Kamu tidak perlu ragu lagi demgan situs judi online yang satu ini karena sudah terbukti kepercayaanya sejak dari tahun 2015 sudah di resmikan sampai saat ini selalu menjadi yang terbaik untuk para pencinta judi online. Langsung saja daftar dan mainkan sekarang juga di situs casino online terpercaya 389Sports dapatkan jackpot ratusan juta dari 389Sports hari ini.
Memanglah web casino online telah diakui keberadaannya oleh semua pemeran dari bermacam negeri, tercantum Indonesia. Saking populernya kehadiran web itu, banyak sekali member yang bersaingan berjudi di game "live casino".
Took me time to read all the link baccarat, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It’s always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained!
I am totally amazed by the statement you make to us, it looks really amazing, and I hope I can enjoy some of the posts that you give us. If you are interested in reading reviews about online games, you can visit my site judi tangkas apk