Andrew Weaver's "Keeping Our Cool": A Summary Review

Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Dr. Andrew Weaver.

Dr. Andrew Weaver’s book, Keeping Our Cool , is an easy book to like, but a hard one to summarize. It’s easy to like because it conveys a sense of Dr. Weaver’s personality, interweaving personal experiences, reactions and viewpoints with the science (and policy issues!) of climate change. It’s tough to summarize for pretty the same reason—but more on that later.

Dr. Weaver is an interesting character. That he is a distinguished scientist is not surprising—he is one of the leading scientists involved in climate modeling in Canada, a professor at the University of Victoria, and a lead author on three of the IPCC Assessment Reports—but his outspokenness and effectiveness as a communicator is perhaps a little more unexpected. His own words in Keeping Our Cool  reveal him to be careful in his judgments and diction, yet passionately committed to the science he explains—and to communicating the consequences that have already flowed, and yet may flow, from the realities the science tries to discern.

Click thumbnail to view full-size
Welcome to the University of Victoria.  Image courtesy of Dmitry Denisenkov and Wikipedia.A few of the famous feral rabbits grazing in front of the library at the University of Victoria, as zero-emissions commuters come and go.  Courtesy Jeffery Nichols and Wikipedia.
Welcome to the University of Victoria.  Image courtesy of Dmitry Denisenkov and Wikipedia.
Welcome to the University of Victoria. Image courtesy of Dmitry Denisenkov and Wikipedia.
A few of the famous feral rabbits grazing in front of the library at the University of Victoria, as zero-emissions commuters come and go.  Courtesy Jeffery Nichols and Wikipedia.
A few of the famous feral rabbits grazing in front of the library at the University of Victoria, as zero-emissions commuters come and go. Courtesy Jeffery Nichols and Wikipedia.

Dr. Weaver’s conviction and confidence are also revealed in an ongoing legal drama. He is (with Dr. Rajendra Pachauri and Dr. Simon Lewis) one of only a very few scientists who have sought legal remedies for lies told about them—I suppose, as the matter is still before the courts, I should have said “allegedly told about them”—by climate change denialists in mainstream media. In his case, according to Dr. Weaver, he was libeled by four articles published in the Canadian paper the National Post between December 2009 and February 2009. In his own words,

I asked the National Post to do the right thing, to retract a number of recent articles that attributed to me statements I never made, accused me of things I never did, and attacked me for views I never held. To my absolute astonishment, the newspaper refused.

Lawsuits are not to be embarked upon lightly—especially in Canada, where frivolous suits are routinely punished by judgments which require the loser to pay all court costs, including the winner’s. (Not coincidentally, a similar system prevails in Britain, where Dr. Pachauri’s suit was settled out of court in his favor. The newspaper pulled the libelous article and posted a full retraction—and paid a rumored six-figure settlement. I suppose I should add that Dr. Lewis’s complaint—he did not sue, but made a formal submission to the UK Press Complaints Commission---ended similarly, with the Sunday Times apologizing and retracting their original article, which had falsified Dr. Lewis’s views.)

Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.  Photo by Remy Steinegger, courtesy of the World Economic Forum and Wikipedia.
Dr. Rajendra Pachauri. Photo by Remy Steinegger, courtesy of the World Economic Forum and Wikipedia.
Dr. Simon Lewis.
Dr. Simon Lewis.

So what does Dr. Weaver tell us in Keeping Our Cool? Well, telling you that is where difficulties begin for the conscientious reviewer. It's easy to say that one characteristic is its distinctly Canadian perspective: the subtitle, after all, is "Canada In A Warming World." That perspective will be attractive for Canadian readers, but also to those interested in how the politics of climate change play out in a jurisdiction a little less well-covered than, say, Washington, DC.

Perhaps the most valuable aspect of the book, though, is its first-person account of a top climate scientist experiencing significant weather and climate events, the social and media reactions to them, and especially the pressure-cooker process of creating an IPCC report. But doing so seamlessly—which I take to be the aspiration here—means writing in rapid succession from the perspectives of human being, of family man, of citizen, of scientist and of scientific writer. That’s a lot of “hats” for Dr. Weaver to wear in a single narrative, and a lot of information for readers to sort out. I’ve already mentioned the advantages, but there is of course an organizational downside too: in a word, it’s not so easy to say just what each of the six chapters of Keeping Our Cool is “about.” However, summoning up an echo of Dr. Weaver’s courage, I’ll try.

The sizeable Introduction focuses mostly upon the personal experiences with weather and media in 2007. In 2007 Victoria, British Columbia, Dr. Weaver’s home base, experienced some very unusual weather—a “horribly wet and dreary” winter, followed, as it turned out, by more of the same in July and August. In between, Weaver spent a month in Greece, where fires reached what the Vancouver Sun termed “biblical proportions,” before the late summer brought rainfall enough to supplant drought with flooding.

Click thumbnail to view full-size
Satellite view of the fires, August 25, 2007."Athens Burning"--view from the Acropolis, August 2007.Night view of the fires, looking north from Athens.
Satellite view of the fires, August 25, 2007.
Satellite view of the fires, August 25, 2007.
"Athens Burning"--view from the Acropolis, August 2007.
"Athens Burning"--view from the Acropolis, August 2007.
Night view of the fires, looking north from Athens.
Night view of the fires, looking north from Athens.

Weaver struggled to craft his response to the media; he knew that on the one hand, it is not scientifically justifiable to attribute any one weather event, but that on the other hand it is also true that climate change “loads the dice” for the occurrence of such extremes. (Indeed, in 2004 Dr. Weaver had co-authored a paper showing that Canadian wildfires burned increasingly wider areas over the span from 1959 to 1999 in association with increased temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations.) His response:

1) You would expect an increased likelihood of such forest fire events because of global warming, so 2) Get used to it, since, in the words of rocker Randy Bachman, 3) You ain’t seen nothing yet.

Randy Bachman (left) performing with Burton Cummings.
Randy Bachman (left) performing with Burton Cummings.

This summer has, of course, seen a parallel event in Russia, where the wildfires and heat have reportedly cost more than 11,000 lives and 15 billion dollars US. In 2007, 68 fatalities were reported, with economic losses of about 2 billion; it seems that Dr. Weaver was prescient in quoting Mr. Bachman.

The discussion of the challenges of attributing specific events to climate change is very clear. It is also very helpful in appreciating the difficulties faced by Dr. Weaver and his scientific colleagues in commenting accurately on the matters. Also discussed very frankly were the issues around air travel and carbon offsetting—Dr. Weaver was uncomfortably aware of the carbon footprint generated by his family’s vacation to Greece.

Chapter One, “Global Warming In The News,” continues somewhat in the same vein, with Weaver’s media experiences with a biased talk radio host, and debating climate change with prominent climate change skeptic Dr. Richard Lindzen—and with charmingly “geeky” graphs of newspaper coverage! Dr. Weaver examines the problems of biasing due to the journalistic ethic of “balance”, of lack of understanding of scientific method, and of scientific uncertainty.

Finally, consideration is given the “Astroturf” brigade which has grown up to oppose the mainstream scientific view on climate change, and the shift toward greater public acceptance of the importance of the issue that occurred in 2007—a shift that seems to have been partially rolled back in 2010 by denialists, such as those challenged by Drs. Weaver, Pachauri, and Lewis. (For more on the public relations war around climate change, see my review of James Hoggan’s Climate Coverup, linked below.)

Joseph Fourier.  This famous French mathematician inferred and quantified the greenhouse effect in 1828.
Joseph Fourier. This famous French mathematician inferred and quantified the greenhouse effect in 1828.

Chapter Two, “A Passage Through Time,” turns more decisively toward the scientific background, with an excellent summary of the early science of climate change, from the early research of Joseph Fourier onward, and the shift into official concern about the effects of climate change expressed with the National Academy of Science and Environmental Protection Agency reports of the 1983. Weaver quotes the conclusion of the latter that:

. . .changes by the end of the 21st century could be catastrophic taken in the context of today’s world. A soberness and a sense of urgency underlie our response to a greenhouse warming.

Dr. Weaver does not mention the response by President Reagan’s science advisor, George A. Keyworth II, who surprised no-one then or now by calling the report “unnecessarily alarmist.” He does, however, continue with a summary of the development of the International Panel on Climate Change, and a vivid account of his experiences as lead writer for the Fourth Assessment Report, which came out in February of 2007.

George A. Keyworth, II, former Science Advisor to Ronald Reagan.
George A. Keyworth, II, former Science Advisor to Ronald Reagan.

Work on the Report began in 2003 with “scoping meetings,” but Dr. Weaver (and his 13 co-authors on what would be Chapter 10) started with the first lead author’s meeting in September of 2004. The “zeroth order draft” was due January 14th, 2005; there were 78 contributing authors. 23 pages, containing 123 peer comments then duly arrived on April 29, just two weeks ahead of the second lead authors’ meeting; and the formal first draft was due August 12. Peer review of that draft provided a break before Weaver received what he calls “the birthday gift from hell”: “172 pages outlining 1331 reviewer comments, concerns, and criticisms.”

Ouch! Weaver comments:

Rookie authors were shell-shocked; veterans were dumbfounded. As lead authors, we had to respond to each comment and indicate how we modified the text to account for the issues raised.

December brought another lead author’s meeting; the second draft was due in March 2006. The expanded group of reviewers for the second peer review luckily seemed a trifle less picky, coincidentally producing the same 1331 comments, albeit in 173 pages this time. Ten days to process that. Blessedly, following more “meetings, discussions, arguments, late nights, and writing,” the final draft was submitted September 12, 2006.


TSU members for working group 1 in session, November 2007.  Image courtesy IPCC and IISD.
TSU members for working group 1 in session, November 2007. Image courtesy IPCC and IISD. | Source

Some folks have the idea that climate scientists are promulgating “alarmism” about climate change in order to “keep the grant money coming”—as if grant money went straight into researchers’ pockets. Elsewhere in Keeping Our Cool Dr. Weaver points out that it would be more logical, if that were really the case, for scientists to insist that the matter needs more study. But those holding such opinions may want to ponder the fact that the process Weaver describes was undertaken on a volunteer basis. IPCC authors receive no pay for their work. Presumably they get to fly to meetings on the IPCC dime, but they have to spend all their time in generic conference centers butting heads with their colleagues--not the most efficient way to get wealthy.

Dr. Weaver concludes the Chapter, inevitably, with his account of the news of October 12, 2007:

. . . a barrage of emails and pone calls hit, asking for interviews about the announcement that the IPCC was a co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. I was stunned. Sure enough, minutes later I received emails from Susan Soloman, chair of Working Group I, and Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the IPCC, congratulating us all. It was a most wonderful end to a process that had taken up enormous amounts of my time over the last two decades.

(Consulting Google, though, I find that it isn’t really the end; Dr. Weaver will be back in the saddle again as a lead author on Chapter 12 of Assessment Report 5. By the way, one of the false statements about Dr. Weaver in the National Post was a claim that he was distancing himself from the IPCC.)

Face of the Nobel Peace Prize Medal.  Courtesy of the Nobel Foundation.
Face of the Nobel Peace Prize Medal. Courtesy of the Nobel Foundation.
Reverse face of the Nobel Peace Prize Medal.  Courtesy Nobel Foundation.
Reverse face of the Nobel Peace Prize Medal. Courtesy Nobel Foundation.

Chapter Three is entitled “The Nature Of Things,” and tackles ancient climates and the methods for their study, ancient extinctions, ocean chemistry, the Ice Ages and rapid geological shifts called “Bond cycles,” which show that Earth’s climate system is capable of relatively rapid shifts.

That last part is less arcane than it may sound, since climate change deniers often argue that “climate change has always occurred” as if it were news—but fail to realize the implication of that argument is that climate stability can’t be assumed in the face of human interference, either. Again, Weaver’s exposition is excellent, characterized by straightforward declarative sentences marshaled into crisp, readable paragraphs.

Future warming scenarios.  Image by NASA, with annotations by Dr. Weaver.
Future warming scenarios. Image by NASA, with annotations by Dr. Weaver.

Chapter Four takes up “The Human Footprint.” The subject matter encompasses both attributional questions--as in the passage debunking attempts to pin warming on solar variations or that describing how the characteristic spatial patterns of the warming we have observed so far are convincingly captured in model climate simulations—and questions regarding the consequences of warming.

Among the latter, Weaver mentions:

  • Detrimental precipitation changes leading to a paradoxical increase in both flooding and drought;
  • Changes in hurricane intensity and a shifting of storm tracks—the latter has been observed in the 2009 and 2010 storm seasons, with hurricanes developing in previously hurricane-free regions;
  • Sea level rise;
  • Loss of Arctic sea ice;
  • Melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

Click thumbnail to view full-size
Multiyear (thick) Arctic Sea Ice.  Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.National Snow and Ice Data Center Arctic Sea Ice Extent, showing the annual minimum coverage.  Graph courtesy NSIDC, captured by Dr. Andrew Weaver.Projected Sea Level Rise by 2100.  Note that this is according to IPPC Assessment Report 4, and is known to exclude sources of additional sea level rise.  Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Multiyear (thick) Arctic Sea Ice.  Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Multiyear (thick) Arctic Sea Ice. Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.
National Snow and Ice Data Center Arctic Sea Ice Extent, showing the annual minimum coverage.  Graph courtesy NSIDC, captured by Dr. Andrew Weaver.
National Snow and Ice Data Center Arctic Sea Ice Extent, showing the annual minimum coverage. Graph courtesy NSIDC, captured by Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Projected Sea Level Rise by 2100.  Note that this is according to IPPC Assessment Report 4, and is known to exclude sources of additional sea level rise.  Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Projected Sea Level Rise by 2100. Note that this is according to IPPC Assessment Report 4, and is known to exclude sources of additional sea level rise. Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.

Though the prose continues to be crisp, the organization here becomes a little more cyclical, as discussions of climate research in Canada and an expanded discussion of detection and attribution studies alludes to topics previously broached in the book.

Also significant is an excellent account of how climate models are actually built and evaluated. Here again Dr. Weaver’s personal expertise really shines through. Given the erroneous impression still shared by many that climate modeling is an affair essentially statistical in nature, it's worth highlighting that the models simulate actual physics:

“The climate model was not constrained [except] by solving the mathematical equations [representing physical processes.]”

In Chapter Four, as throughout the book, there are some really well-designed graphics. But I suspect that they look much better in the hard-cover version than in the paperback edition that I purchased; the paperback's small size and low contrast makes them much less effective than they could be. (No freebie “review copies” supplied for this article!)

Precipitation changes projected for 2080-99.  Note implied  risks of very severe drought in Mexice, Chile and the Mediterranean basin.  Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.
Precipitation changes projected for 2080-99. Note implied risks of very severe drought in Mexice, Chile and the Mediterranean basin. Image courtesy Dr. Andrew Weaver.

Chapter Five continues to interweave policy and science in a somewhat elliptical way under the title “Turbulent Times.” Some of the facts and views in this chapter are as shocking as anything you’ll hear about on this topic—for example:

“In fact, the projected rate of change in the temperature of the nest 2 centuries has no analogue in at least the last 50 million years. . .” (p. 208)

“We’re going to get a meter [of sea-level rise] and there’s nothing we can do about it. . . It’s going to happen no matter what—the question is when.” (p. 215)

“. . .by the end of the 21st century [the “20-year-return” precipitation event under emission scenario A1B] will occur once every 8.6 years.” (p. 217)

“And if global temperatures exceed about 3.3C warming beyond today’s temperatures (about 4.0 C above pre-industrial values), the best estimate is that between 40% and 70% of the world’s species become extinct.” (p. 218)

In reading these quotes, it's worth remembering that Dr. Weaver describes himself as "a born optimist."

Click thumbnail to view full-size
The extinction predictions may seem extreme, but compare species already at risk in 2008.  Table by dodosgoneblogspot.com.Graph of extinction intensity over deep time.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.Habitat loss is the leading cause of extinctions today, and most often it results from human activity.  Image by DirkdvM, courtesy of Wikipedia.Humans have also been known to extinguish species via predation; here is the last Bali tiger, killed in 1937.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.Sometimes extinction is intentional. This image shows the smallpox virus, eradicated by the World Health Organization; polio is nearly extinct, and the extinction of the Guinea worm parasite appears to be imminent.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.
The extinction predictions may seem extreme, but compare species already at risk in 2008.  Table by dodosgoneblogspot.com.
The extinction predictions may seem extreme, but compare species already at risk in 2008. Table by dodosgoneblogspot.com.
Graph of extinction intensity over deep time.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.
Graph of extinction intensity over deep time. Image courtesy Wikipedia.
Habitat loss is the leading cause of extinctions today, and most often it results from human activity.  Image by DirkdvM, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Habitat loss is the leading cause of extinctions today, and most often it results from human activity. Image by DirkdvM, courtesy of Wikipedia.
Humans have also been known to extinguish species via predation; here is the last Bali tiger, killed in 1937.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.
Humans have also been known to extinguish species via predation; here is the last Bali tiger, killed in 1937. Image courtesy Wikipedia.
Sometimes extinction is intentional. This image shows the smallpox virus, eradicated by the World Health Organization; polio is nearly extinct, and the extinction of the Guinea worm parasite appears to be imminent.  Image courtesy Wikipedia.
Sometimes extinction is intentional. This image shows the smallpox virus, eradicated by the World Health Organization; polio is nearly extinct, and the extinction of the Guinea worm parasite appears to be imminent. Image courtesy Wikipedia.

Dr. Weaver frames this information in the context of basic ethics: if we would condemn anyone who tossed dangerous waste onto his neighbor’s property and used force to prevent the neighbor from doing anything about it, we would find it a shocking, criminal act. Why, then, do we tolerate treatment of the atmosphere we all share which amounts to much the same thing?

He concludes the chapter with an extended exposition of emission reduction targets, including the “carbon allotment”—since it isn’t so much the rate of emissions that matters as it is the total amount emitted:

So if society accepts that the 2 C threshold is the upper bound of acceptable global warming, we have 484 billion tonnes of allowable carbon emissions to play with starting January 1, 2007, until the day we finally arrive at zero emissions. And for each year we dither about deciding what to do, we lose 10 billion tonnes, at current emission rates, of our future carbon allotment.

Presumably, we are now working on an allowance of around 450 billion tonnes of carbon. (If that seems somehow numerically out of kilter, you may be thinking of emissions of CO2—they are much higher than emissions of “carbon,” since the CO2 molecule includes two oxygen atoms (atomic weight circa 16) for each carbon atom (atomic weight about 12.))


"The Parting Of The Parents," by Waldmuller.  Responsibility is key for intergenerational equity; here, it is transferred temporarily to the oldest daughter.
"The Parting Of The Parents," by Waldmuller. Responsibility is key for intergenerational equity; here, it is transferred temporarily to the oldest daughter.

The final chapter, “Investing In The Future,” is probably the most discursive of all. It begins with ethical issues, particularly the question of intergenerational equity—it’s an irony that those most concerned not to leave their children burdened with financial debts too often seem unconcerned with potentially crushing “environmental debts.” Weaver then presents the idea of “contraction and convergence,” which he describes as “an equitable framework for allocating carbon emissions as we move toward carbon neutrality.”

A brief consideration of “emissions-free” energy options follows; the “options” comprise nuclear energy, renewable energy sources—the drawbacks of which are honestly set forth—and so-called “clean coal” technology, regarding which Dr. Weaver is, if I read him rightly, dubious but not dismissive.

Considerations of various social policies follow: price signals (a category comprising both cap-and-trade schemes and carbon taxes), the challenge of the car, unreasoning resistance to potentially beneficial change. High on the list of entities exhibiting the latter is the Federal government of Canada, whose chronic obstructionism in climate negotiations Dr. Weaver decries. He is particularly scathing in describing the events around the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Uganda, which ended up adopting “aspirational targets”:

I have no idea what “aspirational targets” are. It strikes me that this political mumbo-jumbo translates into “targets we have no intention of meeting.”

Unfortunately, this assessment is hard to rebut.

CHOGM news, 2007.  Courtesy Ugandan website http://www.ugandaonline.net/chogm.
CHOGM news, 2007. Courtesy Ugandan website http://www.ugandaonline.net/chogm.

Weaver contrasts this governmental bad faith with a couple of 2007 statements from Canadian and international CEOs of notable corporations, couched in much tougher language, calling for meaningful action on emissions mitigation. He concludes by leaving no doubt that one on the things he sees threatened by climate change is democracy itself:

If we reach the stage of crisis management, I can’t see how our western democracies will survive unless we move toward a War Measures Act or despot style of governance with centralized power in the hands of a few. I doubt many of us would want to head down that path.

A traumatic moment for Canadian democracy.  Image courtesy thecanadapage.org.
A traumatic moment for Canadian democracy. Image courtesy thecanadapage.org.

There is an Epilog to Keeping Our Cool. In it, Dr. Weaver speaks with pride and optimism about the adoption by his Provincial government, the government of British Columbia, of a revenue-neutral carbon tax in the 2008 budget. The tax began by taxing carbon at $10 a tonne, rising each year by $5. By law, the revenues are returned to the people of BC by corresponding reductions in other taxes; protections for lower-income citizens were included.

As of this writing, the tax is still in force, though the Liberal government that proposed it looks more than a little shaky; its fate should a New Democrat regime take power is unclear, as the New Democrats are considered pro-environment, yet their leader has spoken unfavorably about the measure. So far—and contrary to Dr. Weaver’s expressed anticipations—no other jurisdiction has followed BC’s lead.

Yet the last sentence of Keeping Our Cool is certainly no less true than when Dr. Weaver wrote it:

The time to deal with global warming is now.

Glacial retreat, Alaska.  Image courtesy Global Warming Art.
Glacial retreat, Alaska. Image courtesy Global Warming Art. | Source
Keeping Our Cool: Canada In A Warming World
Keeping Our Cool: Canada In A Warming World

Hardcover still available new; illustrations should be superior to paperback.

 
Keeping Our Cool: Canada In A Warming World
Keeping Our Cool: Canada In A Warming World

Paperback, used copies available as of November 7, 2010.

 

More by this Author


Comments 8 comments

Neven 6 years ago

That's a great review, Doc!

If we reach the stage of crisis management, I can’t see how our western democracies will survive unless we move toward a War Measures Act or despot style of governance with centralized power in the hands of a few. I doubt many of us would want to head down that path.

This is very relevant in this discussion over at Rabett Run.


Doc Snow profile image

Doc Snow 6 years ago from Atlanta metropolitan area, GA, USA Author

Hi, Neven, and thanks for stopping by!

Since I see that it's just 14 minutes since you made the comment, I'll probably head right over there and see what it's all about.

Given that the failure of the Obama administration/the American political process to deliver meaningful action on mitigation seems likely now to be prolonged for at least a couple more years, the 2010 sea ice vigil and succeeding discussion has really got me worried.

(Note to readers here: Neven hosts an excellent blog focussing on the state of the Arctic sea ice--lots of hard information exchanged, surprisingly little sniping and kvetching.)

http://neven1.typepad.com/blog/


lilmissbookworm profile image

lilmissbookworm 6 years ago

interesting ideas. informative hub thankyou:)


Doc Snow profile image

Doc Snow 6 years ago from Atlanta metropolitan area, GA, USA Author

Most welcome--from one bookworm to another!


dreamreachout 6 years ago

Very interesting and informative hub!! Good work!!

Cheers!!


Doc Snow profile image

Doc Snow 6 years ago from Atlanta metropolitan area, GA, USA Author

Thanks, dreamreachout. Your kind comments are much appreciated!


Aubrey Meyer 5 years ago

The Contraction and Convergence idea introduced by Andrew Weaver in his well organised and useful book, is often cited and well supported: -

www.gci.org.uk/Documents/endorsements_high_res_.pdf


Doc Snow profile image

Doc Snow 5 years ago from Atlanta metropolitan area, GA, USA Author

Aubrey, thanks for highlighting a key point for readers here.

With so much angst around defining the problem, it's really important that we attend to developing the solution(s)--to which the "Contraction and Convergence" concept could definitely contribute.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working