A 77-year-old man from Oklahoma cannot deny human-caused climate change

Frank Balsinger is not impressed with the exegetical skills of science-rejecting Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe. The senator cites the book of Genesis to suggest that it would be impossible for humans to alter the climate.

Balsinger doesn’t claim to be an expert in biblical interpretation but he still easily demolishes Inhofe’s reading of the Bible and his weird attempt to apply that interpretation to climate science.

I’m just going to focus on the fact that Sen. Inhofe was born in 1934 and grew up in Oklahoma, where the wind comes sweepin’ down the plain.

And yet today Inhofe is saying things like this:

My point is, God’s still up there. The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.

Inhofe doesn’t just deny any human contribution to climate change, he denies that such a thing is even possible. He claims the Bible tells him it isn’t possible.

And yet for the past 26 years, Inhofe has represented the state of Oklahoma in Congress. Oklahoma was the heart of the Dust Bowl, one of the worst “anthropogenic” ecological disasters of all time.

The Dust Bowl proved that human activity is quite capable of altering the climate. It proved that Inhofe’s reading of Genesis is hogwash.

Humans plowed up the soil from fencepost to fencepost without worrying about soil conservation. That human activity changed the climate. That human activity meant that what would otherwise have been a nasty extended drought instead became this:

Boise City, Oklahoma, April 15, 1935.

Perhaps you’ve heard about the Dust Bowl. It lasted for years, causing environmental refugees to flee Oklahoma. People have even written books about it.

But Sen. James Inhofe has apparently never heard of, or has completely forgotten about, the Dust Bowl.

A 77-year-old man from Oklahoma who insists that human beings are unable to alter the climate is an amnesiac, a complete idiot, or the disingenuous puppet of science-denying industries.

Inhofe seems determined to prove himself to be all three.

 

Stay in touch with the Slacktivist on Facebook:

Taste the rainbow
'We must love one another or die'
Sunday favorites
LBCF, No. 100: 'BBC3'
  • http://accidental-historian.typepad.com/ Geds

    I would assume the retort to that would be something to the effect of, “But that wasn’t permanent and it wasn’t worldwide, like you’re claiming for this Global Warming thing.  Neener neener.”

  • Anonymous

    James Inhofe may be a 77-year-old man, but that doesn’t keep me from wanting to beat him about the head and shoulders with my hardcover copy of Jared Diamond’s Collapse.

    It’s one thing to deny the specific phenomenon of modern-age global warming.  But to argue generally that human activity can never alter the environment (or that God will always protect us from the consequences — see how well that worked on Easter Island) goes beyond denialism into just plain denial.  Or, at least as likely, into deliberate lying, designed to bamboozle a constituency that’s assumed to not know or care any better.

    Which is to say: Oklahomans?  This is how dumb your senator thinks you are.

  • http://thatbeerguy.blogspot.com Chris Doggett

    I just started reading Collapse. I liked GG&S, but found it very dense reading.

    As for Inhofe, remember the old saw about how difficult it is to get someone to believe something when their paycheck depends on them not believing it. I’d wager Inhofe thinks “The Tragedy of the Commons” is some sort of Shakespear-era play.

  • Lori

    I just started reading Collapse. I liked GG&S, but found it very dense reading.

    IMO, Collapse wasn’t anywhere near as good as GG&S. I can no longer recall any details, but I remember having issues with both the writing & the arguments in Collapse. That was a huge disappointment considering how good GG&S was.

  • P J Evans

    They ought to be able to look out a window and see evidence: what the heck else are reservoirs but man-made alteration of the environment? Highway cuts and fills, cities for Ghu’s sake – I know cities will disappear after we die out, but it’s going to take several centuries.

  • Michael Busch

    Well said.

    When talking to the public about climate change, I’ve usually used depleting the ozone layer as an example of how we’ve already changed the climate, since it was a worldwide atmosphere change in more recent memory.  But, especially in Inhofe’s case, the Dust Bowl is an effective example – he was born during the middle of it.

  • Porlock Junior

    It has also been proved impossible for human beings or God-created natural causes to break the unity of God’s creation by causing a species of animal to go extinct.

    “How did you ever get to be as stupid as this?”

    “It wasn’t easy, I’m tellin ya.”

    But don’t doubt that Inhofe has achieved it — not that it’s equally hard for everyone — and is not lying about, so far as he’s aware.

  • Tricksterson

    Inhofe says that too?  Or are you just reaching a logical conclusion of his illogical thinking?

  • pharoute

    Geez I think we took the car keys away from my grandma before she was 77 and this guy’s a senator?

    Since age discrimination is illegal, but knowing that Congress routinely exempts itselves from laws, I’d be willing to bet that we can pass a “you cannot be older than 70 to run for Congress” law. If we made it an amendment then we don’t even need to worry about it.

  • http://twitter.com/shay_guy Shay Guy

    They exempt themselves from laws when they benefit. With that one, they wouldn’t.

  • Wordsinflight

    I seem to recall that Golda Meir, Israel’s Prime Minister from 1969-1974 said, “70 isn’t a sin”, her age when she took office. I have to confess I’m past 70 (like Inhofe, born in OK during the Dust Bowl), and while I’m not as physically spry as I was when younger, I kinda pride myself on my mental acumen and ability to string words together in a coherent fashion (I’m a writer). However, I did leave OK when I was an infant, which it seems Inhofe did not. Grew up in the Northwest and have always been grateful to my parents for relocating us. Still have family in OK, and of course, would not paint all “Okies” with the same broad brush, Inhofe notwithstanding. Would, however, appreciate those of us 70-plusers not being similarly broadbrushed. My mother lived to be 96 and her mind was, if I may say so, sharp as a tack right up until she left us. ‘Course, she was born in Texas…   

    As for the Constitutional amendment putting an upper age limit on running for Congress, there are other amendments I’d much rather see happen. Like overturning Citizens United, for one.

  • P J Evans

     My father (and his younger siblings) were all born in OK, and they’re much sharper than Inhofe. And they did live through the dust bowl in Oklahoma. In fact, my grandmother was a ‘home agent’, teaching people how to do more with what they had.

  • http://www.nicolejleboeuf.com/index.php Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little

     

    @d1cd8db06f1fc58f7009971f8326eaa9:disqus  Since age discrimination is illegal, but knowing that Congress routinely
    exempts itselves from laws, I’d be willing to bet that we can pass a
    “you cannot be older than 70 to run for Congress” law. If we made it an
    amendment then we don’t even need to worry about it.

    So instead of holding this Senator accountable for his own lying incompetence, we’re just going to blame it on his age? Because everyone over 70 is clearly a lying incompetent? Because no one reading this post, nor no one they know, could possibly be over 70 and not a lying incompetent?

    That’s right up there with deciding from your armchair that the latest school shooter must be mentally ill, and thus implying that everyone who’s mentally ill must be potentially a violent criminal too.

    You, and the three people who “liked” your post, ought to be ashamed of yourself.

  • http://accidental-historian.typepad.com/ Geds

     So instead of holding this Senator accountable for his own lying incompetence, we’re just going to blame it on his age? Because everyone over 70 is clearly a lying incompetent?

    Jimmy Carter.  He’s pretty much not incompetent.  Also Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

  • Anonymous

    That’s right up there with deciding from your armchair that the latest school shooter must be mentally ill, and thus implying that everyone who’s mentally ill must be potentially a violent criminal too.

    As someone who *is* mentally ill, this argument, when clearly spelled out, is a logical fallacy: If P then Q does *not* mean if Q then P.

    Ironically, this is the exact logical fallacy you criticize in the first paragraph of your post.

  • Tricksterson

    And who among the members of Congress, hoping to live to a ripe old age on the public dole do you think would vote for that?

  • Anonymous

    I’ll give Senator Inhofe a snippet of credit for having “lived through the Dust Bowl,” but not remembering it;  after all, he was a baby at the time.  But that’s some heavy-duty disingenuousness, there.  There are photographs, after all, and Easter Island used to have trees.

  • Anonymous

    I’ll give Senator Inhofe a snippet of credit for having “lived through the Dust Bowl,” but not remembering it;  after all, he was a baby at the time.

    The Dust Bowl seems to have persisted until 1940, although the Wiki is ambiguous about when Inhofe moved to Oklahoma. And most of us have at least fuzzy memories of events that happened before the age of six.

    More than pictures, though, Inhofe should have heard stories — from everyone. To say that humanity can’t change the climate — and can’t irreversibly *damage* the environment (the amount of topsoil that was lost is *heartbreaking*, given how long it took to create it) — is ridiculous.

  • Tricksterson

    Even if he was too young to remember one would think his parents would have told him about it.

  • http://jesustheram.blogspot.com/ Mr. Heartland

    Remember, every true American knows that mankind has the God-given right to dominate the Earth as we see fit, And that mankind cannot possibly Effect the earth. 

  • Pseudonym

     “The nations raged, but your wrath has come, and the time for judging the dead, for rewarding
    your servants, the prophets and saints and all who fear your name, both small and great, and for
    destroying those who destroy the earth.” – Rev 11:18 (NRSV; emphasis added)It’s a damn useful verse to have up your sleeve.

  • Si

    The strip-farming that gave us the Dust Bowl was based on a doctrine known as “rain follows the plow” – a piece of bad science that rhymed so nicely with manifest destiny that it was largely accepted as fact in the US (and in Australia as well.) The idea was that human cultivation of land changed the local climate from arid to humid – the theory was that tilling the soil released moisture into the atmosphere (or some shit.)

    This was, sadly, just post-hoc reasoning following a span of unusually wet weather in South West, and the actual effect of cultivation was the opposite of what was desired; by the time the cycle was over and the droughts returned, the prairie was ruined and the topsoil turned to dust, rocks fall, everybody dies.

    Fascinatingly, here is a long post on EXACTLY THE SAME SET OF FACTS (the Dust Bowl) which uses it as evidence AGAINST climate change.
    http://herdgadfly.blogspot.com/2009/12/climatology-update-drought-follows-plow.html

    I think it’s interesting – the writer, indeed, cannot deny that human activity gave rise to the Dust Bowl, and yet still wants to deny that human activity can give rise to the climate change we’re seeing today. Essentially, he’s using the bad science of the 1880s to prop up the bad science of today.

  • Anonymous

    I would like to thank Si for reading and evaluating my “Drought Follows The Plow” piece.  Of course I disagree with the assessment that somehow the acts of plowing by U.S settlers on our Great Plains created climate change. 

    Re-reading you will find mention that the winds which pass over our Rocky Mountains and blast the high plains to the east have their origins in the Pacific Ocean near the volcanic faults that parallel the North American west coast.  So our farmers did not cause the wind.  

    As for the Great Plains, I noted with the poem that the land was always considered arid. Economics drove the farmers to plow and a coincidental change in rainfall provided bountiful harvests for 20 years or so late in the 19th Century..  It was superstition and stupidity plus our governments demand for more grain that expanded the farming which then turned plowed fields into black dust and tumbleweed when drought returned in the Dirty ’30s to snuff out crops.  The farmer caused the dust with poor farming methods but did not cause the decreased rainfall.

    BTW, climate skeptics in America consider Senator Imhoff to be one of but a few US Senators who will take on the “consensus climate” crowd who will drive us to economic destruction, just as is happening “Down Under.” I will rile up your regulars with this analysis from Lord Monckton in WUWT, who asks the question: “Would you purchase insurance if the premiums exceed the benefits provided?”

    Next, Lord Monckton turned to the climate economics and demonstrated that the cost of acting to prevent global warming is many times greater than the cost of inaction. The example of Australia’s carbon dioxide tax showed why this is so. Australia accounts for only 1.2% of global CO2 emissions, and the governments policy was to reduce this percentage by 5% over the ten-year life of the tax. On the generous assumption that the entire reduction would be achieved from year-one onward, the fraction of global emissions abated would be just 0.06%. Because this fraction was so small, the projected CO2 concentration of 412 ppmv that would otherwise obtain in the atmosphere by 2020 would fall to 411.987 ppmv.  Because this reduction in CO2 concentration was so small, the warming abated over the ten-year period would be just 0.000085 C° at a discounted cost of $130 Billion over the 10-year period. 

  • P J Evans

     near the volcanic faults that parallel the North American west coast

    Non. Sense. Volcanos are not faults, they’re mountains. And those winds
    are not caused by them, they’re a world-wide thing. (Haven’t you ever
    heard of  ‘Alberta Clippers’? That’s what ‘blue northers’ are called in
    West Texas.)

    The land on the Great Plains was sold to farmers, with the slogan that ‘rain follws the plow’. Before that, it was called the Great American Desert – it’s really too dry for anything but grazing. However, once it was plowed … everything else followed. Including the drawdown of the aquifers on which everything there now depends.

    Lord Monckton is full of shit, too. He has no qualification in the field of climate science. And I wouldn’t trust his opinion on anything else, either.

  • Apocalypse Review

    I think it was since realized that the crops being planted transpirate water more effectively than the grasses and trees, and this can temporarily produce more rain. But the water still needs to come from somewhere, and I shudder to think of the massive drought that’s going to sweep the plains states when the Ogallala aquifer dries up. (O_O)

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Ever since I found out about the “rain follows the plow” idea, I thought it was interesting that human-induced climate change was once considered possible, even a necessary component of progress.

    Now, of course, it is to be scoffed at. Eesh.

  • Anonymous
  • http://twitter.com/shutsumon Becka Sutton

    A literal reading of Genesis would require humanity to have the capability to change the laws of Physics let alone the climate. Creationists don’t generally realise this or their arguments would be more coherent and less falsifiable.

    Well, actually they probably don’t realise it means that since they are so hyped on their mean God with a big stick that they miss the fact the Fall screwed over the entire universe not just humanity and that makes no sense if all the crap if punishment. Which is probably just more evidence of their unacknowledged gnosticism.

    Note: I do believe in Evolution before anyone assumes I’m a creationist but I’ve always like the fall myth because it gave humans great power – even if we did use it to mess everything up. If I was cynical I’d say the writer knew us too well. X-D

  • http://mordicai.livejournal.com Mordicai

    Isn’t the Book of Genesis– the first part anyway– ABOUT anthropogenic change?  Like, Eve & Adam eat the magical fruit, & then suddenly all the animals start killing each other & the fruit grows thorns & whatnot?

  • Anonymous

    The prevailing wisdom among Oklahoma conservatives is that the Dust Bowl was caused by FDR not allowing them to continue strip farming and by the New Deal program of culling (starving) cattle herds.

    I shit you not.

  • http://jesustheram.blogspot.com/ Mr. Heartland

    Ay ay ay.  And how exactly do they figure that churning up more dust would have prevented dust clouds?  (I know I know, because Real Americans say so.)
     
    The Southern folks’ land abuse cause no small amount of pain and sorrow for those of us on the Northern Plains you know.  I’d feel better about it if instead of trying to macho their way out of responsibility they would own up to at least this one thing. 

    Oh, and Barry Switzer is a crook.  But I guess that’s neither here nor there.

  • Anonymous

    Oh wow, I didn’t think I could hate conservatives any more than I already did. Of course, I regularly think that, and find myself just as regularly proven wrong.

  • http://www.ghiapet.net/ Randy Owens

    The arrogance of people to think that we, human beings, would be able
    to change what He is doing in the climate is to me outrageous.

    Oddly enough, it always seems to be left to me, the atheist, to point out that by his own beliefs, the story of Noah and the Flood ought to directly contradict that notion.  Humans evil –> God floods the Earth with water to clean it.  How is that not what he’s denying there?

  • http://stealingcommas.blogspot.com/ chris the cynic

    Pick me!  Pick me!

    I know this one.

    Ever seen a rainbow?  Well you see the rainbow is God’s symbol that he never intends to destroy the world by flood* again.  Thus that doesn’t count.

    *Does this seem suspiciously specific to anyone else?

    Noah gets out of the ark, “Promise me you won’t do that again.”

    God, “Do what?”

    “Do what?!  Do what you just did.  Kill everyone.  You killed off the entire fucking world in a flood.  Promise me you won’t do that again.”

    God, “Ok, I promise that I will never again kill off all of the world…” Noah starts to sigh with relief, “with a flood.”

    “What?!”

    “I promised, just like you asked, now lets move on.  Tell everyone to have a lot of sex, we have a planet to repopulate.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jess-Goodwin/28602067 Jess Goodwin

    I’m betting Senator Inhofe never heard that gospel hymn where God reassures Noah “No more water” — and then adds “Fire next time”.

  • Tricksterson

    And a population base of only eight people (Noah, his wife, assuming she’s still fertile, their three sons and their wives.  Wait, did Noah have any daughters?  Even so, still a tiny base).  The resulting amount of inbreeding would explain a lot about modern humanity.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alan-Alexander/502988241 Alan Alexander

    If I offered you a billion dollars to do something that had a 90% chance of killing off the human race a century after you died, would you take the deal? What if I offered you a million to do something that only had a 50% chance of killing a few hundred million a hundred years from now? What if I offered you $100,000 to do something which scientists theorize might harm millions but you aren’t educated enough to really understand the theory?

    Now, same questions but pretend you’re a greedy sociopath. That’s why Inhofe says the things he does. Because in his mind, even if global climate change is real, the potential harm to hypothetical people living in the future is less important than the pecuniary benefits he receives right now from opposing legislation to address climate change.

    Or to put that another way: we are ruled by evil people who will kill us all.

  • Lori

    So, speaking of morons and climate change, check out the guy who is running a solid 2nd for the Republican presidential nomination.

    “The dangers of carbon dioxide? Tell that to a plant, how dangerous carbon dioxide is,” he said. 

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/12/rick-santorum-plant-carbon-dioxide_n_1340387.html?ref=elections-2012

    I think Santorum just accidentally gave away the fact that he is in fact not a stupid human, but a really, really bright potato*.

    *Or should that be potatoe in honor of Dan Quayle, the quintessential dumb Republican with good hair?

  • Anonymous

    “The dangers of carbon dioxide? Tell that to a plant, how dangerous carbon dioxide is,” he said.

    Everyone who makes this claim should be gently encouraged to leave America and resettle on the lush, green garden paradise of Venus, where they could enjoy its natural splendor for the remainder of their lives.  Rick Santorum could be President of Venus, or if he prefers, Emperor.  And everyone would be happy, but me most of all.

  • Anonymous

    As an Okie, who was raised parents who both lived thru the Dust Bowl, I have to point out the following.  Many ‘Sooners’, now alive, don’t look at the Dust Bowl as a man made disaster.  Rather they see it as ‘Divine Retribution’ for the ‘Evil’ and ‘Sinful’ activity in the state.

    When I was 9 the ‘Evil’/’Sinful’ activity was drinking and dancing. I haven’t checked since 2000 but I think the activity is letting Democrats/Liberal into the state.

  • Anonymous-Sam

    George Carlin was 71 when he died and was still just as sharp as a tack. His version of mental degeneration was referring to a 3×5 note card between skits.

    [quote]the droughts returned, the prairie was ruined and the topsoil turned to dust, rocks fall, everybody dies.[/quote]

    Ouch! A natural 1 on your agriculture roll!

  • Tonio

    When older people become politically and socially reactionary, we shouldn’t blame mental degeneration. We shouldn’t blame that for Inhofe’s failure to grasp that the Dust Bowl refutes his argument about climate change. That’s not about mental capacity or knowledge, it’s about fear and denial. I appreciate Mondale working for marriage equality. I suppose the real difference between him and Inhofe is that the former looks to the future with hope and the latter looks to it with dread. Perhaps the Inhofes really believe that any return of Jesus won’t be so pleasant for themselves, let alone the alleged nonbelievers.

  • Tricksterson

    I’m willing to bet Inhofe was as daft when he was in his thirties as he is now.

  • Lori

    On the subject over the over-70 set, further proof that Inhofe age is not the issue—Walter Mondale is 84 now and he’s working to help defeat Minnesota’s proposed ban on marriage equality.

    http://www.minnpost.com/political-agenda/2012/03/walter-mondale-kathleen-blatz-help-organize-lawyers-against-marriage-amendm

  • rizzo

    Well OBVIOUSLY GOD caused people to plow too much which caused the Dust Bowl.  So it’s not people that did it, it’s god. 
    Alternatively:  GOD caused a WIZARD to do it. 

  • Stephen Dunscombe

    … I’m going to be honest here: this post is the first time I’ve ever heard it even suggested that the Dust Bowl was human-caused.

    I’m a liberal, agnostic, believer in science and believer in human-caused climate change.  But I’ve never even heard of the idea that the Dust Bowl was human-caused before this.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    It’s not well-known, but I have read of such theories sporadically since I was a teenager. In fact, even today you can experience massive dust storms on a localized scale in eastern Oregon. I was in one such once. Soil conservation isn’t just some hipster urban latte sipping librull thing; it’s the lifeblood of farmers, both family farms as well as the agribiz outfits.

  • Lori

     

    I’m a liberal, agnostic, believer in science and believer in
    human-caused climate change.  But I’ve never even heard of the idea that
    the Dust Bowl was human-caused before this. 

    Are you in the US? If so I am once again crying over all the time our education system wastes teaching a white-washed version of the Pilgrims and how little it spends teaching other things.

  • Tricksterson

    I only know about it because I’m a fan of James Michener.  He covered it in, I believe, Centennial

  • Anonymous

    “Liked” for being in the exact same boat. For as devastating as it was, I honestly didn’t learn hardly anything about the Dust Bowl aside from what I got reading The Grapes of Wrath. I didn’t know it was caused by humans either. You learn something new every day (hopefully).

    Are you in the US? If so I am once again crying over all the time our education system wastes teaching a white-washed version of the Pilgrims and how little it spends teaching other things.

    I think it’s partly that my history classes rarely got far into the 20th century, and to the extent that they did they were pre-occupied with the two world wars. The dust bowl was usually at most a footnote in the discussion of the Great Depression.

  • Guest1

    Get thee to the library and read The Worst Hard Time by Timothy Egan.  The actual drought so strongly identified with the Dust Bowl was probably not a function of human caused climate change.  The human impact that was most directly responsible for the Dust Bowl was unsustainable farming practices in terms of how producers managed their land cover, crops and plowing.  

  • Guest1

    Technically, the Dust Bowl was more about land practices during drought rather than humans changing climate  Climate is the averaged weather conditions (mainly  precipitation and temperature) as measured over the span of 30 years. 
    I say this as someone – a Christological someone – who acknowledges anthropogenic climate change as a real and present concern to the long term sustainability of our economy as well as a world wide threat to the poor.  So I agree that the Senator’s comments were wrong; but don’t agree that the Dust Bowl is an historical example of climate change.

  • Sgt. Pepper’s Bleeding Heart

    I like the part where you acknowledge climate change as a concern for the economy then the world’s poor. Nothing personal–it’s the accepted standard order of priority that bugs me. Climate change will make continuing to increase the high standard of living of rich countries difficult. Oh, and also people in Kiribati will have nothing to stand on and Africans are starving to freaking death. But the economy!

  • Guest1

    I like the part where you acknowledge climate change as a concern for the economy then the world’s poor. Nothing personal–it’s the accepted standard order of priority that bugs me.

    Interesting observation. It got me pondering why this is done.  I can’t speak for everyone but a few insights on my personal thought process.

     I work in climate science outreach and the research shows over and over that the best way to get people to make changes is to make it personal; most people won’t act unless they think it will impact them personally. (Search Community Based Social Marketing for more on this topic).  Professionally, the standard is no matter what your personal sentiments are your communications must be crafted in a way that will effect change, i.e. speak to the personal motivation.

    Also, quite frankly, I think that a sustainable global economy is a huge factor in addressing global poverty.  If we don’t have a sustainable global economy then I think our chances of mitigating global poverty are dim since we will only get more of what we got.

  • Theagnosticswife

    I live in Oklahoma and sadly,at least from my experiences, Inhoff is not in the minority in his beliefs. a state full of sheeple just waiting on God to take care of everything. It’s all in his plan you know.

    Sometimes I am embarrassed and a bit afraid to live where I do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ryan.jeanes.39 Ryan Jeanes

    guy’s an idiot, dangerous fool

  • LeiAnn Syms

    The Panhandle of Oklahoma was what was affected by the Dust Bowl, not the entire state. The reason the grasslands were plowed in the Panhandle is to plant wheat to try and keep up with the great demands of WWI and with no grass roots system to hold the soil in place it blew away hence the Dust Bowl so yes it was human error but when going back to the Bible, just perhaps it was driven by God. Now in conservation efforts man made lakes were made and now Oklahoma has more miles of shoreline than the Atlantic and Gulf coasts combined.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X