Wednesday Open Thread

I'll be working for several hours yet. Here's a new open thread, all topics welcome (except Freddie Gray, please put those in his own thread. If it fills up, I'll start a new one.)

< Bill Clinton: 1994 Crime Bill Went Too Far | Fed. Appeals Court: NSA Mass Call Tracking Program Illegal >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    One in six (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed May 06, 2015 at 08:10:45 PM EST
    Zero in six (3.50 / 2) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:09:39 AM EST
    chances of humankind making the global sacrifices required to reverse, or even significantly attenuate, fossil fuel energy consumption. Until, of course, fossil fuels become scarce...

    Hmmmm a "2". (none / 0) (#14)
    by oculus on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:27:50 AM EST
    Is your prediction too dire?

    He must be made of sterner stuff than I. (none / 0) (#15)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:46:45 AM EST
    Question: Any plans to convert your lawn to xeriscape-ish stuff?

    I lived for 3 years or so in Tucson, and 20+ on the east coast. Thorny cactus front yards make my stomach turn.

    I'm thinking ornamental clumping grasses. Maybe river stones and DG in between?


    No grass in front. Cement patio and (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by oculus on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:53:21 AM EST
    plantings.  Back yard:  disaster. Thinking oftryung to go zen but with no grass/moss/etc.  irregularly placed flagstones with some type of drought-tolerant low groundcover between. Maybe thyme. Maybe synthetic grass. The gorgeous gardens designed like this in Japan:  moss.

    Illustration: (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by oculus on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:01:10 AM EST
    So you will become (none / 0) (#23)
    by fishcamp on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:22:44 AM EST
    a Bryophyte expert.

    Beautiful (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:25:22 AM EST
    You can do oregano along with thyme :) (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by nycstray on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:53:49 AM EST
    Lavender bushes are nice too (I've received all for free during earth day at the farmers market from the water dept)  The oregano I have is a lush green. My mom has a 2 tone thyme ground cover.

    Think that's part (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:29:33 AM EST
    of what Simon and Garfunkel had in their garden.

    Ha, yes (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:33:40 AM EST
    The willow looking tree on the street in street view was actually a peppercorn tree.  No water needed.

    All of which I had in my LA garden (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:27:55 AM EST
    which, in spite of all the green, was quite eco friendly.   The large trees were California live oaks that never lose their leaves and need no water to speak of.  There were things that need water, like the avocado tree, but no grass and lots of green that never needed added water.

    Plus Rosemary (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:28:51 AM EST
    and many other herbs

    I forgot about the rosemary (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by nycstray on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:33:16 AM EST
    Bees go nuts over mine when it is bloom. Kinda scary walking by it when the whole plant is buzzing! My sage is in bloom right now. I planted some anise this year to make tea with, and of course have the required mints and balms . . .

    I turned... (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:00:10 AM EST
    a bare patch of dirt at the crib into a pretty cool rock garden.  I love landscaping with rocks and mulch...no watering, no maintenance. My little bro the fish guy scored me some big pieces of coral to scatter in.

    My brother in law hit the motherload when he bought his McMansion...he got a truckload of monster boulders for free from his contractor for all the business.  It was a b*tch helping him roll them into place, but they look awesome placed throughout his landscape.

    Rocks rock!


    Love those (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by sj on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:12:35 PM EST
    Got a bit of ornamental grass last year and spent literally hours trying to decide which way to go.

    My main problems are (in no particular order)

    1. too much shade
    2. often alternating with high noon heat
    3. Huge blue spruce (trimmed to porch roof height) that drops needles everywhere but especially on the small "hill" between the sidewalk and my porch entrance.

    I'm thinking I would like a rock garden under the spruce but I need alkaline loving plants that also love shade. Also, you know, rocks.

    Good point about shade. (none / 0) (#91)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 03:43:50 PM EST
    I planted some ornamental grasses beside our front walkway a couple years ago.

    Mine mushroom way out to the sides, and are hanging over our front walk in a major way, but they should be standing tall and proud, and not interfering with the walkway at all.

    Google says that's because they don't get enough direct sunlight (north side of house, large roof overhang).

    So, shade makes a big difference.


    How tall/long are they? (none / 0) (#93)
    by nycstray on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:20:38 PM EST
    Even in full sun, I've had decorative grasses do that. I just chop them back when they start having a mind of their own :) They grow back pretty quick and look good again.  On some of the large scale grasses, I cut the outer grass shorter and keep getting a bit longer as I go in and the shorter cuttings support the longer bulk of the plant (kinda like a reverse layered hair cut). I do eventually cut the whole plant back, the 'trim' is sort of a mid term thing before the plant fully mushrooms.  

    I live where I have a lot of coastal breeze/wind, which also contributes to the mushrooming effect.


    That's interesting. (none / 0) (#96)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:36:17 PM EST
    I think the grasses are just plain old fountain grass.

    I would say they're about 3' high/long.

    I can see how chopping the side near the walkway would kind of shore them up on that side.


    I've got that (none / 0) (#101)
    by nycstray on Thu May 07, 2015 at 05:02:26 PM EST
    and the trim works. Just go from sidewalk to about an inch or 2 in (depending on how thick the plant is) gradually getting taller until where you stop is about half as tall as the plant. And then I chop all the way down one or twice a year after that feather stuff starts looking crappy.

    Some of mine is along my front walkway and is southern exposure, and still falls into the walkway, so the trimming and chopping really helps.


    Thank you! (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 05:13:00 PM EST
    There are a ton of great things you can do (none / 0) (#16)
    by nycstray on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:07:02 AM EST
    vs thorny cactus. I've seen a lot a great options for drought friendly landscaping, and some even include a water feature like a fountain or pond.

    Nice thing about going that route, much less upkeep.


    I agree wholeheartedly with you ... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:31:47 AM EST
    ... about cacti in the yard. Ugh! Were you to xeriscape, I'd suggest what my mother did a few years ago in replacing her lawn with a combination of drought tolerant perennials and tall grasses, most all of which are native to Southern California. The house and yard now have a contemporary aesthetic which looks awesome, particularly in the spring when everything is in bloom.

    Perhaps you might consult with a reputable landscape contractor with considerable experience in reconverting yards and grounds into a drought tolerant state. He or she could advise you on what's best for your particular locale and soil, and perhaps even save you a lot of grief and time otherwise wasted through your own trial and error. That's what my mother did, and she's quite happy with the results. And given that water rates will only go up in SoCal, she considers it worth the investment.



    Actually, if anyone read my post (none / 0) (#33)
    by NYShooter on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:41:42 AM EST
    from yesterday about the guy who's the new Republican Chairman of the Science Committee in the Senate, and the slashes to the budget he, and his fellow ignoramuses are proposing, I'd think a 0% chance of anything being done to slow down global warming is even too optimistic.

    (This warrants at least a "1" rating, I would think.)


    Dire but true... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:26:24 AM EST
    the time to act was 30 years ago...I think it's too late now, the damage is done.  Even if we banned the gasoline engine today, there is no stopping China and others from choking the planet.  

    The earth will be just fine though, homo sapiens and other species otoh are f8cked.


    There are other ways to handle it (none / 0) (#65)
    by NYShooter on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:30:22 AM EST
    I don't know whether it's too late, or not. Scientists disagree on that.

    But, the argument many deniers use is "China" and some other countries won't, or wouldn't cooperate, so why should the U.S. go it alone?

    Because, to be fair, if all countries, today, stopped the emissions and did all the things scientists say they should, America would have had a huge head start over the others. Countries like China, and India, only came out of the "underdeveloped" status recently. Since the U.S. had such a head start, and has, by far, been the world's worst polluter for many years, simple economic fairness would suggest that all major countries should start out equally.

    It's not unlike the attitude some Americans have regarding America's native population & our African Americans. Just because a law was passed, after many, many years of the vilest abuse, murder, slavery, etc. and then stated, "Now you're free, go compete," that wouldn't be fair, or realistic, would it?

    Reparations would be the right thing to do, but, well, you know, that's not going to happen. Same thing with some of the countries that should be allowed to catch up a little before agreeing to the same emission rules as America would have.

    Just simple fairness.


    I agree... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:42:19 AM EST
    it would be hypocritical to tell a developing country they can't pollute, after the West has benefitted greatly by polluting the sh*t out of the joint since the Industrial Revolution.

    Not to sound defeatist, but I think we're pretty much stuck suffering the consequences of climate change absent a new world-changing technology in regards to energy.  

    And that's not to say we shouldn't work to lessen the damage going forward, I'm all for it, but let's not pretend there is a "fix" here.  Only band-aids.


    LOL, dog-man, (none / 0) (#72)
    by NYShooter on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:00:41 AM EST
    you're a hero of mine in so many ways, but, being a PhD Climate Scientist ain't one of them.

    At the exponential rate science & technology are zooming ahead these days, if we ceased the emissions immediately, I'd give those scientists a good shot at preventing our goose from being totally cooked.

    Make you a deal; I'll agree to give up on the earth, if you'll agree to forfeit the 7th game of a future World Series your Mets are in, if they're behind big in the 9th inning.



    No deal! lol (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:09:57 AM EST
    I do admire your hope...and you are correct I'm the furthest thing climate scientist, but I like to think I've got a pretty good bead on the human race and how it operates.  This problem is way over our collective head bro.

    A person is smart, people are f8ckin' dumb.  


    I'm afraid I agree (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:13:33 AM EST
    one of the better thing about being 63.

    I have about a acre of beautiful green lawn and I don't do a thing but mow it.  I don't fertilize it or use insecticide or weed killer.  Sometimes in the fall it turns brown.   But it always turns green again.  And I'm always amazed how quickly it happens with a little rain.


    Somebody forgot to (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:14:39 AM EST
    tell the polar bears.

    Crockford says the current polar bear population is "almost certainly" at a level "well above" the official estimate of 20,000-25,000, and could be as high as 27,000-32,000. She told the meeting that even those producing the official figures had admitted to her in an email that the numbers were "simply a qualified guess given to satisfy public demand."

    While hunting was a major threat to polar bear populations in the past, current popular concern focuses on the impact of shrinking sea ice on their habitat. But Crockford argued the animals can cope better with change than many think.

    Of course if the colder trend continues they may be in trouble.

    Sometimes the ice can be too thick, she said, preventing the ring seals on which they prey from drilling holes in the ice. Polar bear numbers in the Beaufort Sea have suffered large declines for this reason in periods including 1974, 1984, and 1992 at times of exceptionally thick sea ice, although their numbers have bounced back a few years later.

    That's a 12 hour lag (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:22:33 AM EST
    if you expect to keep your title you are going to need to do better than that.  If you haven't noticed you have some very hungry competition around lately.
    Perhaps it's time to pass the red nose, rainbow wig and floppy shoes on to a more vigorous advocate?

    Here's a video from those Commies (none / 0) (#32)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:37:18 AM EST
    at National Geographic on the state of polar bears today.

    I find them more persuasive than a cherry-picking dishonest nut with a blog, YMMV.


    et al (none / 0) (#43)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:31:04 AM EST
    Capt, I apologize but it took me a long time to find This and   this but don `t worry.

    You still have 5 species to worry about.

    Speaking of "dishonest," Mordiggian, I know that quoting Jones and Schneider bothers you.  so maybe this will soothe your fevered brow.


    I Bet It Took a Long Time... (none / 0) (#45)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:41:31 AM EST
    ...about as long as it would take me to find some links that state the Earth is flat.

    Jim (none / 0) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:44:18 AM EST
    Paul Simon could have written these words for you:
    All lies and jests
     Still a man hears what he wants to hear
     And disregards the rest

    Joe, I would never (none / 0) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:52:39 AM EST
    interfere with a person's right to believe any silly claim of death and destruction spewed by the hoaxers.

    Like religion it is a matter of faith.

    When do you think they will start crucifying the bears?



    If you start messing with (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:55:15 AM EST
    fat hairy gay men you are going to have to go through me

    Don't worry Howdy (none / 0) (#124)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:57:16 PM EST
    You be safe.

    "Hey Haywood what you in for?" (none / 0) (#54)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:57:16 AM EST
    "Didn't do it, lawyer f8cked me."

    As (none / 0) (#57)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:02:46 AM EST
    I would never interfere with ostrich's hiding their head in the ground, or people hiding their head wherever they please.

    I suppose these hoaxers are sneaking out at night to blow torch all the glaciers worldwide just to make themselves look good.


    Who are you going to believe (none / 0) (#71)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:46:33 AM EST
    Jim or those lying glaciers?  👽

    And The Lying Iņupiat People... (none / 0) (#81)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:21:54 PM EST
    ...we are staging a political coup by relocating their city to feed the Global Warming myth.

    And those pesky Maldives who are seeking to buy a new homeland so they can cultivate 'the myth'.

    "But Fox News Says..."


    You are Quoting... (none / 0) (#58)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:12:01 AM EST
    ...a Super Liberal, Jim.

    You know no such thing (none / 0) (#66)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:31:36 AM EST
    And in fact you're a perfect illustration of my previous remark, Jim.

    It's the evidence I believe that speaks for itself:

    Scientists have noticed a curious thing happening as rising temperatures melt the Greenland ice sheet. The ice that's left is getting darker, making it more susceptible to further melting, according to new research presented at the European Geosciences Union (EGU) conference in Vienna.

    Scientists have identified three ways in which the gleaming white ice sheet is getting darker, each contributing to the normally-reflective ice sheet absorbing more of the sun's energy.


    The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) today announced that  the monthly global average concentration of carbon dioxide surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) in March 2015 for the first time since measurements began.

    That's the problem with being a Foxbot, Jim, you presume your opponents are Hillary/Obamabots because of your own indoctrination.

    If you want to practice your mind-reading act, I suggest you do so at children's birthday parties before trying it here again.


    Who (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by FlJoe on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:42:30 AM EST
    you going to believe, notorious hoaxers such as NOAA, EGU and other such disreputable organizations.

    Believe Jim not your lying eyes. I am sure all that melting ice is just the byproduct of all the polar bear farts from their exploding population.


    It took you 12 hours ... (none / 0) (#122)
    by Yman on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:01:09 PM EST
    ... to find a couple of wingnut blogs as "evidence" - Heh.

    That's pathetic.

    Although not as pathetic as your outright lies about Schneider and Jones.


    et al (none / 0) (#125)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:04:25 PM EST
    And none of you can show me how MMGW is a Scientific Theory.


    Now, snark and tell me all about how consensus is science.


    Of COURSE no one can (5.00 / 1) (#132)
    by Yman on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:57:16 AM EST
    Some people willfully choose to ignore the thousands of scientific studies that support MMGW.

    Some people have their heads in the sand ...

    ... or somewhere else.


    There's evidence (none / 0) (#130)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:35:54 AM EST
    But you won't learn about it watching Fox Noise.

    One reason, according to the article, is that science is taught poorly. We learn it as a set of inarguable facts. The Earth revolves around the sun. Gravity made the apple fall from the tree and hit Newton on the head.

    But in fact, science is messy. It starts with a hypothesis, a theory about the way something works. One scientist finds evidence that seems to prove or disprove that idea. Others pile on, testing it, modifying it, and sometimes disproving it.

    People see news of these debates and think, "Aha, those scientists don't really know what they're talking about." So they feel free to choose whichever scientific facts they want to believe in and cluster into social groups based on those beliefs.

    When people say they do not vaccinate their kids or do not believe in global climate change, they are not declaring that they don't believe in science. They are declaring their membership in a particular social group of like-minded people. Those bonds within social groups reinforce themselves and are hard to break.

    No charge for the lesson.


    et al 1 (2.00 / 1) (#135)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 08:55:13 AM EST
    No matter what you want to believe, consensus is not science.

    MMGW is a small t theory and must be accepted on faith based on a collection of documents and claims....

    Wait. Excuse me.

    I just defined religion.



    Yep (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by FlJoe on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:05:36 AM EST
    Satellite images are exactly the same as ancient myths.

    Satellite images have nothing to do with science (2.00 / 1) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 04:56:27 PM EST
    and consensus isn't science.

    Ask the ghost of Ga Washington. He was killed by his doctors bleeding him...which was the consensus for pneumonia at that time.

    Ask the thousands of dead women who died of childbirth fever:

    Puerperal infections, also known as postpartum infections, puerperal fever or childbed fever, is any bacterial infection of the female reproductive tract following childbirth or miscarriage. Signs and symptoms usually include a fever greater than 38.0 °C (100.4 °F), chills, lower abdominal pain, and possibly bad smelling vaginal discharge.[1] It usually occurs after the first 24 hours and within the first ten days following delivery.[2]


    Because their midwives and doctors had consensus that germs didn't exist so they didn't wash their hands. In fact, bloody aprons and smocks were considered good advertisements.

    Inflammatory theory was central to the work of eighteenth-century physicians. As an explanatory theory which could both elucidate the nature of fever and offer a means of cure, it appeared to be the most valuable perspective on the subject and retained its power for centuries. The writers of the puerperal fever treatises were particularly strongly influenced by it and it finds its way, to a greater or lesser extent, into all of the works considered here.


    Alexander Gordon was perhaps the most insistent of those who claimed that the origin of puerperal fever lay in an inflammatory process,63 and he emphasized the need to bleed and purge the patient as copiously and as early in the disease as possible:

    "Whenever a patient complained of a fixed pain in the abdomen, attended with fever, I bled and purged her without regard to the cause. And I found this treatment equally successful in every case, when those symptoms were present, whatever was the cause of the disease."64



    Satellite images are data (none / 0) (#158)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 10:58:41 PM EST
    and your ridiculous denial of science by appeals to the past when the experts were wrong about something does you no credit.

    As Carl Sagan so aptly put it:

    The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
    Broca's Brain (1979),

    MMGW is supported ... (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by Yman on Fri May 08, 2015 at 07:52:30 PM EST
    ... by thousands of peer-reviewed studies published by thousands of climate scientists.  It is anything BUT a religions

    Unlike everything you post, it's based on facts an data, not opinions and myths.  Which is why all you can post are links to wingnut blogs.


    et al, if you are truly interested in (2.00 / 1) (#159)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 11:46:14 PM EST
    facts, read this link.

    Do it carefully and read the material that it provides links for.

    If not, don't and just continue to make foolish claims about weather and trends and that consensus is science. Which, of course, it is not.

    Your choice.


    Is this site subsidized by the Koch Brothers (none / 0) (#162)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 05:13:55 AM EST
    Like many websites into climate denial?

    "Go to this website, folks, it'll explain how all those glaciers are melting and the permafrost getting warmer without the climate being affected,.  It's just weather, you know"

    I think I'll pass, Jim.


    I see that you didn't read the link (none / 0) (#163)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:02:25 AM EST
    Instead of making wild claims about Koch, why not try to refute the points???

    I say try because I know that you don't have the background to do any critical thinking re the various claims and counter claims so you will scream "consensus" as if that meant MMGW was true.

    But you may be able to understand this:

    What they found was that 99% of the time you could process random data using Mann's techniques and it would generate a Hockey Stick shape. This meant that Mann's claim that the Hockey Stick graph represented an accurate reconstruction of the past climate was in tatters.

    Here are some examples. Below are eight graphs. Seven were made by processing random numbers using Mann's techniques. The eighth is the actual Hockey Stick chart from Mann's paper. See if you can spot which is which.


    In the graph below the dotted line is the original Hockey Stick chart as published by Mann and as adopted and promoted by the IPCC. The solid line shows the past temperature reconstruction if the data used by Mann is averaged using the correct statistical analysis techniques rather than Mann's unconventional ones. As can be seen the familiar Medieval Warm Period re-emerges and the 1990s cease to be the hottest of the millennium, that title is now claimed by the early 1400s.


    Eventually a US senate committee of inquiry was set up under the chairmanship of Edward Wegman a highly respected Professor of mathematics and statistics and in 2006 his report was published. You can download it here.


    Conclusion 1. The politicization of academic scholarly work leads to confusing public debates.

    Conclusion 2. Sharing of research materials, data, and results is haphazard and often grudgingly done. We were especially struck by Dr. Mann's insistence that the code he developed was his intellectual property and that he could legally hold it personally without disclosing it to peers.

    Conclusion 3. As statisticians, we were struck by the isolation of communities such as the paleoclimate community that rely heavily on statistical methods, yet do not seem to be interacting with the mainstream statistical community. The public policy implications of this debate are financially staggering and yet apparently no independent statistical expertise was sought or used.

    Go to the article go see the graphs


    Anyone can manipulate numbers (none / 0) (#165)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:20:02 AM EST
    and that you fell for it doesn't say much about your mathematical abilities either.

    BTW, that doesn't explain this:

    Data from new sensors, combined with older sources, are providing a more complete picture of ice thickness changes across the Arctic. In a recently published paper, R. Lindsay and A. Schweiger provide a longer-term view of ice thickness, compiling a variety of subsurface, aircraft, and satellite observations. They found that ice thickness over the central Arctic Ocean has declined from an average of 3.59 meters (11.78 feet) to only 1.25 meters (4.10 feet), a reduction of 65% over the period 1975 to 2012.

    In addition, near-real-time thickness data from the European Space Agency's CryoSat-2 satellite are now available from the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at the University College London. The spatial pattern of ice thickness in spring is a key factor in the evolution of sea ice through the Arctic summer, and CryoSat-2 data bring the promise of regular sea ice thickness monitoring over most of the Arctic Ocean.

    The data indicate that Arctic sea ice thickness in the spring of 2015 is about 25 centimeters (10 inches) thicker than in 2013. Ice more than 3.5 meters (11.5 feet) thick is found off the coast of Greenland and the Canadian Archipelago, and scattered regions of 3-meter (10 feet) thick ice extend across the Beaufort and Chukchi seas. Elsewhere, most of the ice is 1.5 to 2.0 meters (4.9 to 6.6 feet) thick, typical for first-year ice at the end of winter.


    Let that figure sink into your skull.


    "That's just weather, not climate."



    Uh, the link isn't about numbers (none / 0) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:41:06 AM EST
    it is about statistical analysis and how Mann' used his own method which has been found improper in that it yields incorrect results.

    Quit worrying about the bears. They have survived for thousands of years...even the Medieval Warming Period when the world was much warmer.


    A graph is created using numbers. (none / 0) (#170)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:55:55 AM EST
    Thanks for confirming my diagnosis of dyscalculia.

    And a house is built using wood (none / 0) (#172)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 11:36:33 AM EST
    And your point remains incorrect.

    Try reading the article and all the links in it.


    Try keeping up with the latest (none / 0) (#174)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 12:29:40 PM EST

    The idea that 'global warming has stopped' has been promoted in contrarian blogs and media articles for many years, and ultimately the idea of a 'pause' or 'hiatus' has become ensconced in the scientific literature, including in the latest assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    Multiple lines of evidence indicate that global warming continues unabated, which implies that talk of a 'pause' or 'hiatus' is misleading. Recent warming has been slower than the long term trend, but this fluctuation differs little from past fluctuations in warming rate, including past periods of more rapid than average warming. Crucially, on previous occasions when decadal warming was particularly rapid, the scientific community did not give short-term climate variability the attention it has now received, when decadal warming was slower. During earlier rapid warming there was no additional research effort directed at explaining 'catastrophic' warming. By contrast, the recent modest decrease in the rate of warming has elicited numerous articles and special issues of leading journals.

    Let me know when the evidence (none / 0) (#181)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 09:04:32 PM EST
    Multiple lines of evidence indicate that global warming continues unabated, which implies that talk of a 'pause' or 'hiatus' is misleading.

    doesn't need qualifier words.


    Parse the words or deal with the facts (none / 0) (#183)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 09:37:56 PM EST
    but don't try to do both at the same time.

    Facts don't need qualifiers (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 07:25:39 AM EST
    An article 2 years old (none / 0) (#186)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 07:46:38 AM EST
    is the best you can come up with.

    I hate to break it to you, chum, but TDM has no credibility as a source in the subject of climate change.

    Do they talk about the Polar Vortex?

    That's what happened in early 2014. The polar vortex suddenly weakened, and a huge high-pressure system formed over Greenland. The high-pressure system blocked the escape of all that cold air in the jet stream, and allowed part of the polar vortex to break off and move southward. Places as far south as Tampa, Florida experienced the wrath of this wandering polar vortex. Most of Canada and parts of the Midwestern United States had temperatures colder than Alaska at the height of this cold snap!

    It's important to remember that not all cold weather is the result of the polar vortex. While the polar vortex is always hanging out up north, it normally minds its own business. It takes pretty unusual conditions for it to weaken or for it to migrate far south, and other things can cause cold arctic air to travel our way, too.

    Yep, the Polar Vortex was just a blip in the weather, it had nothing to do with climate at all, THERE'S NO GLOBAL WARMING!

    Thanks for the feedback.


    This just in (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 08:24:29 AM EST
    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released a statement today that carbon dioxide levels have reached a new global level of 400 parts per million for March, even though global temperatures have not risen for nearly 19 years. This means that for March 2015, carbon dioxide levels across the globe remained at 400 ppm* for the entire 31-day period with no increase in global mean temperatures as measured by RSS satellites


    BTW - Artic sea ice same as it was 20 years ago

    Looks like the sky isn't falling.

    Of course that makes sense. No temperature increase for 19 years so no change in ice amount.


    You have quoted, once again, (none / 0) (#188)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 08:42:24 AM EST
    from a RW obscure site that at least pretends to be about the news.

    Why am I not surprised?


    Btw, this also just in (none / 0) (#190)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 09:09:58 AM EST
    Goddard doesn't want you to click on this link because it will demonstrate what a liar he is when it comes to the data and why he misleadingly uses a photographic comparison instead.

    Figure 1. Arctic sea ice extent for April 2015 was 14.0 million square kilometers (5.4 million square miles). The magenta line shows the 1981 to 2010 median extent for that month. The black cross indicates the geographic North Pole.

    Arctic sea ice extent for April 2015 averaged 14.0 million square kilometers (5.4 million square miles), the second lowest April ice extent in the satellite record. It is 810,000 square kilometers (313,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 long-term average of 15.0 million square kilometers (6.0 million square miles) and 80,000 square kilometers (31,000 square miles) above the previous record low for the month observed in 2007.

    For comparison's sake, 250K square miles is about the size of Texas.

    So, we have a literal Texas-sized reduction in sea ice, but that it doesn't exist because of two satellite photos taken 20 years apart.

    This isn't even worthy to be called pseudo-science.

    When are you going to wake up and quit being an unpaid shill for the CCD crowd?  How come they never explain the melting permafrost causing craters in Siberia, or the shrinking glaciers in most places around the globe?

    As for Chicken Little, your own confused cluckings about the sky will be falling over here because of ISIS/Iran come to mind............


    Why are you so afraid of the truth?? (none / 0) (#192)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 12:37:26 PM EST
    You and the other members of the far Left are being played. The picture is accurate....

    BTW - 20 years ago was 1995, not 1981.

    Still can't subtract, eh??



    Um, yes, the satellite records (none / 0) (#193)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 01:08:50 PM EST
    And averages go back to 1981, by using 1995(20 year interval), Stoddard is cherry-picking the data to his own misleading advantage.

    It's amazing how often you have to declare victory over others, here, Jim.  


    The interesting part is that (none / 0) (#194)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 04:42:19 PM EST
    the climate change has been flat for around 19-20 years.

    So it follows that the ice would be about the same.

    And no victory, Mordiggian. This isn't a game. My background is in engineering. If something works, I believe it. And initially I believed. But the longer I looked the more holes I found. And their claims don't work.  I'm just trying to demonstrate that MMGW is a hoax and the people engaged in it know that it is all about money and power. Various players have even admitted it. The latest is that democracy must be shed to allow proper attention paid to the problem.

    And that's how it all got started. Mann, and others, wanted something to boost their grant levels and discovered what Hollywood, and media in general, always knew..... that disaster sells. So they started forecasting gloom and doom. That their predictions were always wrong didn't bother them. Then the wacko environmentalists, recognizing that this was an issue they could use joined in and since it was about power the various Demo, and some Repub, politicians joined in.

    And despite your short comings in math and that you didn't know the difference between deficit and debt I have confidence that, if you addressed the scientists, bureaucrats and politicians with the same skepticism that you do Republicans you'd see that all of this, as I noted, is about money and power.


    Um, yeah: (none / 0) (#195)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 05:04:43 PM EST
    Jim, be honest here and quit blowing smoke about your qualifications and my own shortcomings.

    And since this thread (none / 0) (#196)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 05:08:39 PM EST
    is almost at the 200 mark, you're welcome to bring facts and evidence to the table at the next open thread, instead of natterings from discredited RW sites, and see if you can conduct an honest discussion with anyone else on the topic.

    Have a good evening.


    So much for an appeal for reason (none / 0) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 06:59:41 PM EST
    Have a good evening.

    And remember what Dr Jones said on 7/5/2005

    The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn't statistically significant.

    Now the 7 has become 19. And:

    If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences.

    could be means that it hasn't been


    Yeah, darn those glaciers (none / 0) (#198)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sun May 10, 2015 at 08:52:06 PM EST
    For melting like Dr. Jones wanted them to do.

    Snark and stupidity are almost all you have left, Jim.


    Heh - A rightwing tabloid (none / 0) (#191)
    by Yman on Sun May 10, 2015 at 09:14:08 AM EST
    ... and denier David Rose (who has no expertise at all) are your "facts".

    Do you know how many "facts" Rose has claimed that have had to be retracted just in the past couple of years?  And that's just the ones where they were forced to retract because anyone with a double-digit IQ was laughing at them.

    You really make it too easy, Jim.  It's almost boring.


    Try (none / 0) (#171)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 09, 2015 at 11:21:26 AM EST
     A real scientist, a real skeptic looked hard at the real numbers and came up with the real answer.
    Oh, by the way this study was partly funded by those well known climate hoaxsters the Koch Bros.

    And so???? (none / 0) (#173)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 12:07:19 PM EST
    My total turnaround, in such a short time, is the result of careful and objective analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which I founded with my daughter Elizabeth.

    That was by RICHARD A. MULLERJULY 28, 2012.

    Published in the Opinion section and not peer reviewed.....

    Yeah. Right down your ally.

    But you really don't know, do you?

    In an October 2004 Technology Review article, Muller discussed blog postings by McIntyre and McKitrick alleging that Mann, Bradley and Hughes did not do proper principal component analysis (PCA).[11] In the article, Richard Muller stated:

    McIntyre and McKitrick obtained part of the program that Mann used, and they found serious problems. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken.

    "Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppress all data that do not. To demonstrate this effect, McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called "Monte Carlo" analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!

    That discovery hit me like a bombshell, and I suspect it is having the same effect on many others. Suddenly the hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. How could it happen?[11]

    He went on to state "If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions

    Thanks for proving my point re Mann's graph.

    However Muller freely assumes that authority despite his lack of any expertise in climatology or atmospheric physics.

    In an excellent study on the psychology of prominent climate change sceptics Dr. Myanna Lahsen of the University of Colorado observes that many of them have, like Muller, a background in theoretical physics.

    That means he is a smart dude...in theoretical physics. And one of the team said:

    University of Georgia climatologist Judith Curry, who was a co-author on the prior studies but declined to sign her name to the latest, offered a lengthy criticism on her blog. Although the temperature record itself is useful, she asks this question:

    If determining attribution is as simple as comparing a couple of curves, why is everybody else wasting their time with sophisticated modelling and analyses?

    What an interesting question.

    Mjuller pretty well nails Mann's Hockey Stick to the ice house's wall. And then one of his own team, a few years later, won't sign off on the study that converted him.

    Really... This is what you call consensus??

    And yet we're wasting around $22 billion this year on trash that we could be spending on cancer research....

    I mean.... Really???


    When (none / 0) (#175)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 09, 2015 at 12:43:55 PM EST
    When an article starts ofF
    The story surrounding Richard Muller is providing some interesting insights into the psycho-dynamics of climate change science.
    I know it's time to put on the hip boots. Judith Curry  PhD degree in Geophysical Sciences and self taught psycho-analyst, no need to attack the science itself lets look for underlying mental issues, with his daughter no less, oh dear.

    Did you actually read?? I think not. (none / 0) (#176)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 01:17:03 PM EST
    The first link goes to Wiki and it has Mueller shooting down Mann's infamous hockey stick graph.

    And without that the whole hoax starts to fall apart.

    And that you don't believe that politics are involved when government, and other, grants are involved is hard for me to believe. After all, the Koch brothers were brought up. lol

    And I couldn't find your quote in Curry's link. She quotes other sources extensively so perhaps it is there. And his daughter is a scientist herself so your crying that she shouldn't have to defend her position is a sexism dog whistle of the first degree.

    As for peer review:

    Responding to an inquiry from Nature, Elizabeth Muller confirmed that McKitrick reviewed the urban heat island paper and that the paper was technically rejected the first time around.  Muller declined to release information about the timing of the peer review process.

    Curry is with the U of GA and is an accredited climatologist.

    And pot calling the kettle black is just delicious.

    Muller says Curry distanced herself from the paper because she disagrees with the findings, and that she has an alternative theory - that the climate is random, so any correlation between increases in carbon dioxide and warming is an accident. His response: "`I've said to her that the unfortunate aspect of her theory is that it's untestable. Now a theory that's untestable is not something I consider to be a theory."

    No one who frequents this blog has ever seen me refer to climate as `random'.  I have an email discussion with Muller, who said he used the word `random' in the interview since it is more easily understood by the public.  He has read my post  Trends, Changepoints, and Hypotheses.  Re the climate shifts hypothesis, he is concerned that it is not testable.  I argued that it is just as testable as the other two hypotheses, and observations are not currently sufficient to distinguish between these three hypotheses.

    Reading comprehension?? (none / 0) (#177)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 09, 2015 at 01:34:32 PM EST
     the very first sentence of of your link from Curry
    The story surrounding Richard Muller is providing some interesting insights into the psycho-dynamics of climate change science.
    , although I do think she has a point with the psycho part when it comes to you.

    So you aren't capable of (none / 0) (#178)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 02:17:39 PM EST
    doing anything except noting my rather obvious overlooking.... I was never good at Finding Waldo...

    But seriously, do you not see the confusion, back and forth snarks and isn't it rich that Mueller claims:

    "`I've said to her that the unfortunate aspect of her theory is that it's untestable. Now a theory that's untestable is not something I consider to be a theory."


    Say what??? Mueller agrees with me!

    A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.

    Which again proves my point. MMGW is not a big T theory but is just a small t theory with all kinds of contradictions and failures.

    And I especially like this from Curry. It shows she thinks.

    Here is a quote from Galileo that I am using in the consensus paper:  "In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual."

    Curry, I and many others are in good company.


    I see no confusion (none / 0) (#179)
    by FlJoe on Sat May 09, 2015 at 03:32:00 PM EST
    Just like you Mueller was a harsh critic of Mann and his methods. Mueller then proceeded as all scientists are wont to do and actually did the research himself, lo and behold he proves to himself he was wrong and he graciously  admits it. Now to you and other deniers he is some kind of charlatan.

    That's what science is Jim, the numbers don't lie and the liars get outnumbered. Your science depends on this gut feeling that this overwhelming consensus on AGW is some  product of a global hoax or some kind faith based psycho-dynamic. Talk about theory with a small t, more like nonsense with a capital N.


    I don't think Mueller's claims have survived (none / 0) (#180)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 08:59:13 PM EST
    peer review.

    And "overwhelming" is meaningless.

    And Mueller has not changed his opinion of Mann's methods.

    And without the hockey stick and with the Medieval Warming Period included all the hoopla fades away.

    There were no cars around during the 12th-15th centuries.

    And yes, that's what Mueller said, a theory must be testable.

    So you think he was right on one thing and wrong on the other??

    How much confusion do you want?


    Really? YOU don't "think' they have ... (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Yman on Sat May 09, 2015 at 09:20:43 PM EST
    ... survived peer review?  Heh.  IOW - You don't know.  

    But your sudden appreciation for peer-reviewed studies after ignoring/denying them for years in favor of opinion pieces and wingnut blogs was pretty funny...


    Yes, when I don't know something (none / 0) (#185)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun May 10, 2015 at 07:41:54 AM EST
    I say so.

    You should try that.

    And actually I later found where he finally got it published in a low level magazine.

    Only took him a couple of years.

    The take away from Mueller is simple.

    He never was a "denier." He described himself as agnostic. So the claims by the hoaxers that he has "converted" are false. Fancy that....

    He has never changed his position re Mann's hockey stick claims.

    The linked to article describes a group of people who are focused on prestige, money and government contacts. Fancy that. ;-)

    Members of his own team wouldn't sign off on the paper. That tells us that the conclusions are shaky at best.

    In his own words he says that a theory must be testable. And MMGW isn't.

    At the end of the day all you believers have is "consensus." You buy into that because you are a strong believer in "group think." That works only when the government has a gun. Even there, as the USSR and its satellite governments found out, its life span is limited.

    And consensus isn't science.


    Precisely (none / 0) (#189)
    by Yman on Sun May 10, 2015 at 09:06:39 AM EST
    You have no clue, yet you falsely suggest that it wasn't peer reviewed (i.e. " I don't think Mueller's claims have survived peer review").  Then, when it turns out it WAS peer-reviewed, you try to minimize it by calling it a "low level magazine" and stating it took him 2 years to get it published.  Not that it matters, since your conclusions are based on opinion pieces from non-experts written on wingnut blogs, as opposed to the thousands of peer-reviewed studies by actual experts published in scientific journals.


    So transparent.


    Hooey (none / 0) (#199)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon May 11, 2015 at 01:01:02 PM EST
    I don't think
    is not a false anything. It just reflects the writers belief at that point in time. And better yet, it highlights that the writer is noting that it may not be correct.

    You should be so honest.

    What is fact is that it took him almost two years to get it published in a low level magazine.

    That speaks to what his peers felt about the study.

    Your claim that the blogs are "non experts" is laughable:

    This site was created by John Cook. I'm not a climatologist or a scientist but a self employed cartoonist and web programmer by trade

    So what you would support is a site that is neither about Skeptical Science or actual science.



    Is something you excel in. (none / 0) (#200)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Mon May 11, 2015 at 01:58:28 PM EST
    My choice to to heed .. (none / 0) (#169)
    by Yman on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:50:25 AM EST
    ... the opinions of actual experts in climatology and their thousands of scientific studies that support their conclusions, as opposed to silly claims from a wingnut blog.

    Not claims, Jim, but facts (none / 0) (#141)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:30:01 AM EST
    Like melting permafrost, melting glaciers, etc.

    While historical photos like these show change over many decades, satellites are giving us a better understanding of how Earth's ice cover has changed in the more recent past. The satellite era, beginning in the 1970s, has given us a picture of accelerating ice changes in places like Alaska, Greenland and Antarctica, where the loss of land-based ice is contributing to global sea level rise.

    Forty-six gigatons of ice from Alaskan glaciers was lost on average each year from 2003 to 2010. That's according to data from NASA's GRACE satellite, as analyzed by a team of scientists from the University of Colorado at Boulder.

    Facts be facts, not beliefs, Jim.  Even when you think you know more about climate science than the people who have PhDs in the field and have studied the subject for decades.


    What you have is called weather (2.00 / 1) (#144)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 04:32:47 PM EST
    and climate change.

    There is no proof that any of this is caused by man.

    I don't have to out run the bear, I just have to out run you.

    And yes. I know more about the subject than you.


    If you guys ever want to save time (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 04:42:02 PM EST
    you could just cut and past entire previous sub threads.  

    I think I an promise you (none / 0) (#146)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 04:42:49 PM EST
    no one would notice.

    Howdy, I just read the first 8 comments (2.00 / 1) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:04:30 PM EST
    on today's (Friday) Open Thread where you have 5 of the 8 and tell us about color theory and other interesting subjects. (sarcasm alert!)

    He who lives in glass houses should never start the rock throwing.


    If you have a problem with Howdy (none / 0) (#151)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:18:36 PM EST
    complain to the management or take a chill pill, Jim.

    MYOB, Mordiggian (2.00 / 1) (#152)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:00:16 PM EST
    I will point out Howdy's double standard whenever I feel fit.

    Omg (none / 0) (#153)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:02:10 PM EST
    you are bickering about me now.

    According to you (none / 0) (#154)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:07:49 PM EST
    "There are none so blind (none / 0) (#150)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:15:58 PM EST
    as those who will not see."

    Susan Crockford? (none / 0) (#123)
    by Yman on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:03:07 PM EST
    An opinion piece from denialist employed by the Heartland Institute?

    Now you're just trying to be funny.


    Here's a list of animals... (none / 0) (#121)
    by desertswine on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:29:30 PM EST
    that have gone extinct in the last 100yrs. All of them, it would seem, due to human activity.  Missing from the list, I see, is the ivory-billed woodpecker.

    Who knew "Southern Pride" (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by magster on Wed May 06, 2015 at 08:30:00 PM EST
    Meant the rich suburbs south of Denver? SMDH.

    I live in Parker, so the embarrassment is strong with yours truly.

    Sounds like a parent problem listening to the KDVR reports.

    That Parker mess (none / 0) (#4)
    by christinep on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:15:27 PM EST
    Accept my thoughts of solace, magster, for that embarrassment fueled by those Parker parents.  Yep ... after weeks of making fun of the Texas crazies, I had to sheepishly admit to friends elsewhere that the Parker photo could compete with the Texas bunch that fears Federal Invasion et al.

    Wow, I guess you didn't hear...... (none / 0) (#34)
    by NYShooter on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:53:10 AM EST
    Chuck Norris, came out and warned Texans This is the REAL DEAL. He's telling Texans that's why those 5 Walmart stores closed so abruptly, to house the troops of course.

    His parting words, he just knows Texans will fight the coming invasion "to the last man."

    Hey, if it was anybody 'cept (75 year old) Chucko, you know?


    The part about (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:59:06 AM EST
    the WalMart stores and the tunnels connecting them is totally my favorite part.

    I was thinking about this.  Is it possible Mr Obama is playing 11 dimensional chess again?  Honestly if he was he could not have done a better job at both exposing the utter insanity of the right but placing all the republican presidential candidates between a rock and a nut case.  They have to tap dance around this, which makes them look either completely insane or completely craven, because if they don't they will offend their largest voting block.

    Pass the popcorn.


    There's (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:22:36 AM EST
    no 11 dimensional chess going on. Frankly nobody has to do anything. It's the natural result of too much Fox News and talk radio.

    That's what (none / 0) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:28:12 AM EST
    he wants you to think

    As funny, and crazy, as this is, (none / 0) (#38)
    by NYShooter on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:19:29 AM EST
    Norris is just a fruitcake civilian. But, what's Gov. Abbott's excuse? With all the Yahoos in that State, and all with multiple handguns & rifles, what's he say if some enlisted guy, just walking down a street, gets gunned down by one (or more) of those "Patriots?"

    What an irresponsible jerk!


    It that case (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:30:14 AM EST
    i would say he would have some splainin to do.

    Be careful (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:57:25 AM EST
    Know your (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:39:35 AM EST

    After all, it was less than a century ago that the Ku Klux Klan dominated much of Colorado politics, even claiming then-Gov. Clarence Morley a member.


    "The image is pretty disturbing, especially if they have real assault rifles in their hands," University of Colorado-Boulder ethnic studies professor Arturo Aldama told Fox 31 Denver. "Not to mention, the Confederate flag and its legacy of white supremacy, Klan violence and the Jim Crow South."

    And along with you neither  the professor nor HP do.

    And those aren't assault rifles.

    Other than I'd say we have some stupid kids doing some stupid things and using a terrible stupid war as a prop.

    BTW - Speaking of students and mean nasty things, just heard on the TV where a teacher gave a student a zero on four papers because the student wouldn't write, "Jesus was a myth."

    And no, that wasn't MSNBC.


    Wow - you "heard it on TV" (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Yman on Fri May 08, 2015 at 07:58:36 PM EST
    BTW - Speaking of students and mean nasty things, just heard on the TV where a teacher gave a student a zero on four papers because the student wouldn't write, "Jesus was a myth."

    Perhaps you should stop believing all the silly allegations spewed on Faux News.  it would save you a lot of embarrassment.


    If you weren't so eager to attack and snark (2.00 / 1) (#160)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 11:48:59 PM EST
    you would know that Mordiggian provided a link to it.

    And you would not have looked foolish.


    Yes, I was able to find (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 05:09:42 AM EST
    an account that didn't make the college student sound like a martyr ready to be fed to the lions, or, since this is Florida, the allegators.

    As for attack and snark, you're still the top in those areas, Jim.  


    The issue is that the teacher attacked (none / 0) (#164)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:07:25 AM EST
    the students belief because of the teacher's political beliefs.

    You are merely validating actions such as this.


    Nope (none / 0) (#166)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:32:45 AM EST
    If you read the article I linked to, the claim you made was and is ludicrous.  In response to this question:

    After reading the three articles answer the following questions in 4 paragraphs (20 sentences minimum)

    1. What is something Lady Julian is saying/doing that women should not be saying/doing at that time under the Christian mythos?

    2. From the article on the Nuns what makes their defiance of male dominance so important?

    3. Why did Christianity, and its male gods, want to silence these women?

    She wrote the following:

    that I have studied, I must confirm that I cannot arrive at the answer to this question. This is because no information provided by the textbook or the articles gives any objectively presented information that can help one find an answer or an informed opinion.

    Specifically, there is no fact based solution to this question. The question is trying to cause the student to take a Marxist, secular humanist, feminist opinion that Christianity [...] is a myth and that it is oppressive of women...

    And, as you can see, her answer was non-responsive.

    You,OTOh, want some sort of intervention if the course somehow goes beyond the belief system of the student.  And this is about Christianity in history, not whatever beliefs she may have these days from whatever church she goes too.  I really doubt this professor requires his pulls to renounce Christ in order to get a decent grade in his class.

    Of course, you couldn't be bothered to find out the facts, because Christians are persecuted in America about every week because of their beliefs, right?

    she wrote the following:


    Oh, I saw the link (none / 0) (#168)
    by Yman on Sat May 09, 2015 at 10:46:39 AM EST
    But the only thing that was "foolish" was this:

    BTW - Speaking of students and mean nasty things, just heard on the TV where a teacher gave a student a zero on four papers because the student wouldn't write, "Jesus was a myth.

    Not sure if that's your characterization of the events or a silly version from Faux News you "heard on TV", but either way ... it's seriously funny.


    I'm aware of history -- Mayor Speer (none / 0) (#31)
    by magster on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:26:33 AM EST
    and "Klan"yon City, Colorado

    So i should get a good grade (none / 0) (#37)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:13:41 AM EST
    in geology even if I insist in my course work that the world was created in 7 days and can't be more than 6,000 years old, based on the Bible.

    Here's an even-handed look at the case in question

    Under the assignments, the teacher issued a warning, which reads in part:

    I DO NOT want you to write about how wonderful you think Christianity is now because women can do A, B, or C. History is history and facts are facts and your opinion on if it is better now or not is irrelevant for this discussion...If you really feel the need to express your opinion on how you think Christianity is now for women you may email me, you may call my office or I would love for you to stop by for a nice cup of hot tea where we can talk about it but it does not belong in this assignment.

    Lots of RW sites that didn't have this or other info, they want to make her another martyr, even though the class work apparently didn't require her to renounce Christ, as many RW nut cases would have us believe.


    So you approve of teachers (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:44:04 AM EST
    demanding students don't think for themselves??

    Why yes, yes you do.

    I would love for you to stop by for a nice cup of hot tea where we can talk about it but it does not belong in this assignment.

    That's called shutting down any disagreement and just propagandizing.

    And what did the student write?

    ...Specifically, there is no fact based solution to this question. The question is trying to cause the student to take a Marxist, secular humanist, feminist opinion that Christianity [...] is a myth and that it is oppressive of women...

    BTW - If your course was an actual science course you'd have a point.

    But the course is another some poly sci, or some variation, of it where the teacher can't stand disagreement.


    No, I approve of (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:20:47 AM EST
    Professors setting the requirements for the courses they teach, and not whiny students who believe they're some sort of special snowflake because of their belief in Jesus.

    Really?? (none / 0) (#126)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:07:54 PM EST
    No oversight??


    But we both know you believe that only if the Prof spews your special brand of hate.


    i believe in professors controlling (none / 0) (#131)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 06:40:08 AM EST
    The content of their class work, rather than subjecting it to the ideological oversight of outsiders or administration.

    Glad I could clear that up for you


    And the professors (2.00 / 1) (#134)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 08:51:09 AM EST
    material has no oversight??




    Hey (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:04:58 AM EST
     maybe we should have climate threads!

    Spectacular idea, Capt. (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Anne on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:08:21 AM EST
    Makes perfect sense to me.

    Heh (none / 0) (#139)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:10:24 AM EST
    the other seems to have drawn them all completely out from under their rocks.  

    et al 2 (2.00 / 1) (#149)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:08:36 PM EST
    Maybe Anne can tell us how they do things in Baltimore...

    And Howdy can opine on his back yard, dogs and life as an illustrator???


    She might know more about (none / 0) (#157)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 10:54:48 PM EST
    Baltimore the many others here.

    thanks for the substantive discussion (none / 0) (#140)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:20:34 AM EST

    George Orson Welles (May 6, 1915) (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by desertswine on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:42:49 PM EST
    Today is the 100th anniversary of Orson Welles' birth.
    Welles was politically active from the beginning of his career. He remained aligned with the left throughout his life,[137] and always defined his political orientation as "progressive". He was a strong supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, and often spoke out on radio in support of progressive politics.[137] He campaigned heavily for Roosevelt in the 1944 election.

    He was also an early and outspoken critic of American racism and the practice of segregation.

    My father worked for Welles on (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by Peter G on Wed May 06, 2015 at 10:48:34 PM EST
    "The Mercury Theater of the Air" in 1938, as errand boy, sound-effects assistant, public relations assistant (clipping for scrapbook); his first job out of college. A temperamental genius, running his own stage company and radio troupe, as well as freelancing on CBS to make money (as the voice of "The Shadow"), Welles was only a year older than my dad at the time.

    Very interesting. Did you see the (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Wed May 06, 2015 at 10:57:48 PM EST
    fairly recent bio movie?

    No, I didn't (none / 0) (#59)
    by Peter G on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:14:55 AM EST
    Can you offer a more specific pointer of any kind?

    Here: (none / 0) (#77)
    by oculus on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:31:17 PM EST
    Me and Orson Welles.

    Addendum:  not really a "bio."   Based on a novel.


    I read the book. Lots of fun. (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by Peter G on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:01:12 PM EST
    Missed the play that was based on it, both in NYC and in Philly. Would like to see the movie.

    Growing up, my contemporary memories ... (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:50:33 AM EST
    ... of Orson Welles were his TV commercial appearances on behalf of Paul Masson, promising that they would serve no wine before its time. And it looks like he was having a good time making them, even if the director and film crew were probably not.

    I really had no idea how awesome a filmmaker Welles actually was in his heyday, until I was introduced to his movies in college. If I had to name one as a favorite, it would have to be "Touch of Evil."



    I just remember the Johnny Carson bit (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:05:32 AM EST
    about how he would " eat no cow before its time"

    He was a hell of an actor (none / 0) (#44)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:33:53 AM EST
    who in many ways was ahead of his time.  Look up the peas commercial on YouTube.  I don't link to it because it's NSFW.

    Here's an article about how he helped Superman stop an alien invasion.  He also edited a book of SF stories about alien invasions, IIRC.


    That was him? (none / 0) (#82)
    by sj on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:21:58 PM EST
    I kind of remember those ads. I don't think Welles himself had reached my consciousness yet.

    Same here. (none / 0) (#85)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:35:03 PM EST
    Welles was well past his prime by that time, and judging by those outtakes, he wasn't exactly all that conscious himself while making them. They remind me of the first time I attended a wine tasting when I was 23, and nobody told me I wasn't supposed to drink each glass. By its conclusion, I was trashed.

    Wells appearid in (none / 0) (#115)
    by Repack Rider on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:26:46 PM EST
    ...1967's "Casino Royale," a spoof of the
    Dond series rather than homage.  The film was troubled, not the least by the fact that Wells and Peter Sellers couldn't stand each other.

    In a scene where they have a conversation across a table, the scene was shot with one or the other of the actors, and a stand-in on each side, because they would not appear on the set at the same time.

    sellers must have really been a pain.  The director killed his character to get rid of him.


    While he'll forever be the hilariously inept Inspector Jacques Clouseau to me, I consider his deft three-way performance in Stanley Kubrick's "Dr. Strangelove" to be a true cinematic tour de force.

    But from what I read about him, Sellers was a painfully introverted and pathologically insecure man, alternately craving affirmation and approval and then projecting himself as a demanding prima donna.

    It's therefore not surprising to learn that Sellers and Orson Welles clashed during the filming of Casino Royale. The set likely wasn't big enough to contain both their monstrous egos concurrently, and they probably sucked all the oxygen out of the room.



    Jon Stewart (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:56:32 AM EST
    SeaWorld has discovered that BS works, ... (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 03:07:01 PM EST
    ... and vows to continue its "Our Orcas Are Happy Orcas" ad campaign until every last low-hanging piece of ignorant fruit that hasn't yet seen the documentary Blackfish has been plucked and hustled through its doors.

    How long now before SeaWorld becomes a Fox News / AM squawk radio cause du jour?


    Santorum and Bolton to announce May 27th (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:14:36 PM EST
    Is there no end? This is a golden mean for comedians though :). Long live comedy.

    Oy. (none / 0) (#6)
    by nycstray on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:30:08 PM EST
    Oh well, better for Hillary and Bernie. Those crack pots in the clown car can't hold a candle to the 2 running on the left. At least we get to have some intelligent discussion about real issues :)

    Be nice if mid-terms had better D turnout, as it looks like they can't seem to find a rational person on the right . . .   they have NO bench when it comes to POTUS, so it would be nice to turn the tide in the 'off' years.

    All I can say is, thank dawg I live in CA! :)


    Charlie Pierce is going to lose his mind. (none / 0) (#8)
    by Anne on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:41:00 PM EST
    John Bolton?  Rick Santorum?  



    Maybe he will make Roose (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:12:02 AM EST
    Secretary of Flaying.  Ramsey is probably still a little young for the job.

    The Clown Car/Caravan Needs a Leader... (none / 0) (#48)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:51:15 AM EST
    ...and Captain Crunch would be my choice, hands down.

    Saw you comment (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:53:25 AM EST
    in the closed thread.

    Google maps will not do street view.  Is that just an iPad thing or what?


    Huh ? (none / 0) (#61)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:26:44 AM EST
    In google maps just hit the Earth button to switch from map to satellite view.


    You can grab the screen to look around, zoom in/out, or hit the arrows to move on down the street.

    I don't have any apple products, but I know my phone maps for Google is infinity better than the version for iPhones.


    Well, ok (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:30:16 AM EST
    but you are still switching to earth and I do not see a way in earth to copy a link.

    If I'm missing something it would not be the first time.


    Btw (none / 0) (#75)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 11:43:22 AM EST
    i don't see a way to copy a link in maps either.  Probably not worth any more band width unless you know the iPad setting I might be missing to see this.

    It's Built Into the Link... (none / 0) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 01:25:20 PM EST
    ...I am guessing if you can't see it, it's not an option.

    Try opening it in a browser on your iPad rather than using the actual map app.


    I don't know what to tell you, Capt (none / 0) (#92)
    by Zorba on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:17:18 PM EST
    But I am on an iPad, and I had no problem seeing the street views that Scott posted, by just hitting his links.

    No (none / 0) (#95)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:30:05 PM EST
    me either.  But can you make your own link from google maps or google earth to post?  Can you go to a different location and get the link for it?

    Yes (none / 0) (#100)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:58:56 PM EST
    Just copy the link in the address bar, what you see is coded into the link.  WYSIWYG

    It's easy to test, find a map/streetview you like, and copy and paste the link into another tab or even a different browser.


    Maybe I'm not being clear (none / 0) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 05:36:26 PM EST
    there is no address bar in the iPad app.

    I tried opening it in a chrome browser window by going to google earth dot com.  No.
    You get options to download different devices.  

    Yes, I was able to click your link and go to that location.

    No, I can no find a way to make a link myself.


    Zorba (none / 0) (#107)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:17:57 PM EST
    do have a question for u.  Or any iPad user really.  2 questions.

    Do you have the Google Earth app or the Google Maps app installed on your iPad.  

    If you DO NOT try opening either in a browser window and tell me if you see an address bar from which you can copy a link.

    I have the apps installed so when I try to open either through chrome it just opens the app.


    Capt, try going to (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Zorba on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:37:31 PM EST
    Earth Scout.
    Just type in an address there.  The main problem with it is that it very frequently gives an "approximate" address, but it's also easy to move the view around.
    I've had a lot of fun with it, looking up some of our old addresses.
    But if it's an address that you are totally not familiar with, it would probably not be as helpful, because you would not know which house was the one you wanted to look for.

    I'm on an iPad 2 using Safari (none / 0) (#110)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:49:15 PM EST
    With iOS 8.3. If you're still using 8.2 or lower, that might be part of the problem here.

    I had the first link open in a new tab and got a photograph with the heading Google Maps.  Let me try an old Indian trick I learned once from an old Indian.

    Try this link. I used tiny url dot com.


    The link worked (none / 0) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:01:00 PM EST
    so did Scott's. It opened the location in Google earth with no address window.

    The problem is not opening the links of others it's making one myself because the iPad app has no address window.

    Also I am using a mini.  That could matter.


    One other interesting thing (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:05:53 PM EST
    in both the links, yours and Scott's, the resulting location gave me an image that would not only pan left and right but also up and down.   That is not possibly in the app I have.   It only pans left and right.  Not up and down.

    I'm am running iOS 8.3.  I just checked.


    Google Maps app (none / 0) (#117)
    by ruffian on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:44:24 PM EST
    on iphone, should be the same on iPad: .At the location on the map you want, drop a pin by pressing and holding. Bottom of the screen will have a bar that says 'dropped pin  near...'. Swipe up on that bar ad you will get a 'share' button.

    I don't see how to share anything (none / 0) (#118)
    by ruffian on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:49:48 PM EST
    from Google Earth app, other than selecting and copying the location form he search window. But as you found, that is not a URL, it is just an address.

    address as in street address, not link address. (none / 0) (#119)
    by ruffian on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:50:39 PM EST
    Thanks (5.00 / 1) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri May 08, 2015 at 07:08:24 AM EST
    Shawshank Redemption escapee (none / 0) (#5)
    by oculus on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:24:29 PM EST
    arrested in Brevard County FL after 59 yrs. on the lam.

    Tim Robbins was arrested? (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by MKS on Wed May 06, 2015 at 09:40:16 PM EST
    about time (1.00 / 1) (#10)
    by McBain on Wed May 06, 2015 at 10:21:25 PM EST
    For a Crime He Didn't Committ ? (none / 0) (#50)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:53:10 AM EST
    The guy looks more like Nick Nolte (none / 0) (#84)
    by ruffian on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:15:24 PM EST
    Nice (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:48:47 AM EST
    Nice Christian Makes Video Game To `Kill The F@ggot,' Like Jesus Would

    The game makes very clear that its goal is to shoot and kill gay people (with liberal use of the pejorative F-word in the game's title, at that). Players get points for killing gay people--more points if the person killed is transgender--and they lose points for any straight people they kill. It's hard to make a judgment call about the "most" offensive thing in this game, but we were particularly disturbed to hear the game's announcer celebrate a kill by saying, "AIDS carrier eliminated."

    Allow me to take a moment for the first amendment.  I'm ok with this.   Just like I'm ok with the crazy ole bat suing every living gay person in the name of God and his son Jesus.
    Because it rips off the scab and shows the infection to the world.  This stuff is no longer dangerous to us.  It only makes the point.  These people have lost and they know it.  I admit to a bit of guilty schadenfreude at watching them flail and twist in the wind right next to the rainbow flag.

    I Think That is Known as... (none / 0) (#56)
    by ScottW714 on Thu May 07, 2015 at 10:01:20 AM EST
    ...the Death Rattle, and if it's anything like racism, will be rattling for a long damn time.

    Just another way deep in the basement closeted republican who hates himself to the point of cashing in on his own virtual destruction.


    U.S.Congressman Carlos Curbelo, R-Miami (none / 0) (#76)
    by fishcamp on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:19:16 PM EST
    is coming to speak in Key Largo on May 27th.  His topic is "What is going on in Washington".  There's a Q-&-A time and a cash bar.  If KeysDan comes up and Coral Gables comes down we could swarm the place.  I can't go alone for fear of getting beat up due to some of my possible questions.  BTW, what is going on in Washington?

    Washngton... (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by kdog on Thu May 07, 2015 at 12:36:41 PM EST
    is going on in Washington, next question?

    Cash bar?  What a cheapskate.  And not too bright, open bars buy votes Dude!


    Open bars also invite trouble. (none / 0) (#86)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 02:56:30 PM EST
    I've never worked one, regardless of event or occasion, in which we didn't end up with a problem from at least one person who didn't know when to stop. We're prohibited by law from serving people who even appear intoxicated. But when they're on a roll, they tend to not appreciate that and sometimes, I've even been threatened with violence by individuals for refusing to serve them.

    Wedding receptions with open bars are generally cool to work, because with rare exceptions most people do try to be on their best behavior with all the family and friends bearing witness. But I find working corporate Christmas parties to be the worst, even though the money's pretty good. I don't know why, but for some reason when co-workers start drinking together, it's like they're trying to prove something to each other, and so it's not uncommon for such occasions to devolve into a race to see who's the last one standing.



    Fishcamp, (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by KeysDan on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:40:42 PM EST
    I am working on my questions.  So far, (1) How was that Air Force One ride to Miami, (2) When does the district get Ilena Ros-lehtinen (R. Fl)  back.  Things are just not the same since she was re-districted. Ilena was actually Chair of the House Foreign Relations Committee, which was pretty scary. (4), How is David Rivera these days, and (5) Why the cash bar?  And, what happened to (3), oops.

    If you guys really do this, (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:43:20 PM EST
    I want to see the video!

    Video of the forcible (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:52:44 PM EST
    ejection from the venue!

    Think I have to avoid that gathering (none / 0) (#103)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 07, 2015 at 05:30:36 PM EST
    Have a friend that is a relative of Curbelo.

    I have friends in low places.


    Oh oculus, I will promise (none / 0) (#111)
    by fishcamp on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:55:32 PM EST
    to mind my manners, and avoid using words like clown car.  But I wonder if jim would consider this a visit to a tea party forum?  I doubt there are many TP'ers in Key Largo, but I do have questions about all the Republican candidates, so I will have to be careful.  And Donald I certainly agree with you about the booze.  Key Largo is a funny little drinking town with a fishing problem.

    My (none / 0) (#128)
    by ragebot on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:16:31 AM EST
    Mom use to say there are two things to do in the Keys, drinking and fishing.  Being a cancer survivor who's doctor has advised alcohol is not indicated I can't/don't drink any alcohol so I am stuck sailing, fishing, and diving.  Just as an aside I just got an Inspire 1 and would love to film the event in 4K, but from a safe distance.  Maybe mile marker 99 or so.

    Has he been in Washington long enough (none / 0) (#87)
    by CoralGables on Thu May 07, 2015 at 03:03:12 PM EST
     to know what is going on in Washington?

    Some people have been there for years ... (none / 0) (#89)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 03:08:11 PM EST
    ... and still don't know what's going on.

    fishcamp you gotta see this (none / 0) (#90)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu May 07, 2015 at 03:17:57 PM EST
    sarc, that is something (none / 0) (#108)
    by fishcamp on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:29:51 PM EST
    I would never think about doing due to sharks, but it is a great idea and video.  And on a fly rod no less.  That guy is my hero.

    Pope Francis accepts Liberation Theology (none / 0) (#94)
    by MKS on Thu May 07, 2015 at 04:23:49 PM EST
    That is a big change, but Francis comes from Latin America......so he will see poverty and dictatorships differently.

    Pope Francis is also willing ... (none / 0) (#106)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 06:54:09 PM EST
    ... to beatify the late Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero, who was gunned down by a death squad at the direction of right-wing warlord Roberto D'Aubisson in March 1980, while he was saying mass in a convent chapel. The ceremony is due to take place on May 23 at San Salvador's National Cathedral, the same place where Romero used to regularly preach the Theology of Liberation.

    During both his short tenure as archbishop (1977-80) and posthumously, Romero had been regularly demonized and denounced by both U.S. and Latin American wingbats as a Communist sympathizer and Socialist enabler. So were Catholic lay worker Jean Donovan and three American nuns, who had been invited to the country by Romero to help tend to the poor and alienated, and who ultimately met a similar fate only eight months after his assassination, after first being kidnapped and raped by D'Aubisson's goons. In fact, on the eve of his beatification, the archbishop's still being criticized in certain conservative circles.

    (Donovan's story and eventual martyrdom are beautifully recounted in the acclaimed 1982 documentary Roses in December. As for D'Aubisson, he remained at the helm of his country's Nationalist Republican Alliance party until his own smoking-induced death from esophogeal cancer in Feb. 1992, at age 48. Only after he was finally gone, could El Salvador begin to breathe easier and tamp down the internecine violence which had plagued the country during his reign of terror.)

    Speaking as someone who came of age during that time, I had always found Liberation Theology to be one of the most embraceable and meaningful of all Catholic doctrines. Pope John Paul II alienated a lot of Catholics when he rejected its legitimacy upon his ascension to the Throne of St. Peter.

    As The Vatican's head of state, JP2 was certainly one of the most influential world politicians of our times. But I'm also of the opinion that as Priest-in-Chief, the man's innate political conservatism clearly led the Roman Catholic Church astray from a theological perspective.

    Because as the late pontiff repudiated Liberation Theology, he also embraced the odious likes of Fr. Marcial Maciel, the thoroughly corrupt and morally bankrupt founder of the Legion of Christ, he authorized various covers-up of clergy-related crimes both at The Vatican and abroad, and he ignored the money laundering shenanigans taking place at the Vatican Bank under his watch. In all too many respects, the Church is still dealing with the heavy fallout from JP2's papacy.



    I did not know that about Bishop Romero (none / 0) (#109)
    by MKS on Thu May 07, 2015 at 07:35:56 PM EST
    Wonderful turn of events.

    Romero was a wonderful and caring man. (none / 0) (#120)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu May 07, 2015 at 09:16:17 PM EST
    Both he and Jean Donovan are sterling examples of Catholics who deliberately chose to walk the walk in their lifetimes, and not merely talk the talk as so many other s-called "religious people" do.

    Ms. Donovan, in particular, should be acknowledged and venerated for having chosen of her own volition to walk away from a very privileged upbringing and well-heeled life in Westbrook, CT, to instead take up the cause of the poor in what was then one of the most wretchedly violent places in the western hemisphere.

    May Heaven bless them both, as well as countless other lay workers and clergy who toil away in relative anonymity in some seemingly Godforsaken parts of the world (and even our own country), to bring some small measure of comfort and aid to those in despair, who could otherwise expect none to be forthcoming.



    While sainthood for Oscar Romero (none / 0) (#142)
    by KeysDan on Fri May 08, 2015 at 09:46:50 AM EST
    is welcomed, the plan of Pope Francis to canonize, or declare a saint, the 18th century missionary, Junipero Serra, is more controversial.  Native Americans claim that Sera subjugated thousands of Indians along the West Coast using missionary tactics that enslaved the Christian converts.  While these protests may bring to the fore the historic zealotry of missionaries, discrimination in God's name, is not unknown to modern proselytization.  

    Donald or others that may be interested in the workings of the Vatican, I recommend "God's Bankers--A History of Money and Power at the Vatican." by Gerald Posner.


    ... of white men in North America, historically speaking, proved a pox upon Native Americans, both literally and figuratively. As the most prominent historical figure in the early history of white California, it's entirely understandable that Fr. Junipero Serra has come to symbolize the white imperial / colonial experience in the region.

    But the white man's presence and experience throughout modern California history has hardly been monolithic. And in that regard, there's considerable evidence that the establishment and presence of the Jesuit missions there under Fr. Serra's leadership during the latter part of the 18th century may have actually tempered the behavior of other white colonialists, whose personal ambitions were often much less altruistic.

    Truth be told, the real scourge of Native Americans along the west coast, as well as Native Alaskans and Hawaiians in their respective regions, was not necessarily the white man himself, but rather the various viral pathogens which accompanied his arrival, for which native peoples had never developed any antibodies within their natural immune systems to resist infection, due to their lack of prior generational exposure.

    The introduction of common childhood diseases such as measles and chicken pox, which were otherwise relatively benign in white people, proved catastrophic to the various native populations of the Pacific Rim and Hawaiian Islands and produced the equivalent of genocide, often wiping out whole indigenous communities in a matter of mere weeks or months.

    Thus, many of the native peoples residing in California at the time of the white man's arrival were most often subsequently displaced from their established locales not by force, as occurred in so many other parts of North America, but rather by a pathogen-induced attrition.

    But whether through violence or disease, in any event the subsequent results were invariably the same, and the white man's rise to positions of socio-economic dominance in these locales benefited directly and greatly from the corresponding reductions of native populations, so to speak.

    Native American activists are absolutely right to point out the ultimately corrosive role of Catholic missions as part of the initial vanguard that was the white colonial experience in California, because native peoples were reduced, marginalized and subjugated as a direct and primary result of it.

    But any political argument being offered that Fr. Junipero Serra himself should be entirely representative of that paticular experience -- and it IS a political argument -- is likely a gross simplification of an otherwise complex historical narrative. The underlying story, as is often the case in these matters, is much more fascinating and tragic to behold when examined and considered in its entirety.



    Amazing (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu May 07, 2015 at 06:34:15 PM EST
    Stupidest "Debate" of the Week: Nutbag Islamist Anjem Choudary vs. Raving Bigot Pamela Geller

    Plus Hannity.  Pammy is now the target of a fatwa.  You would think she would be happy and proud.  Why is she demanding the President protect her?  
    I defended this rather insane act.  But guess what, you got what you wanted girlfriend.  Enjoy it.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#114)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 07, 2015 at 08:23:17 PM EST
    you would think she would be proud but then again most conservatives are scared little children.

    "Of course Brady knew." (none / 0) (#127)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri May 08, 2015 at 05:12:41 AM EST
    "If the NFL can't prove it, that's probably because he was only looking out for one man in this situation--Tom Brady. Everyone else, it seems, was expendable."
    -- Diana Moskowitz, "Tom Brady Threw Those Poor Ball-Deflating Jamokes Under The Bus," Deadspin (May 6, 2015)

    Having now been effectively caught in an obvious lie, tonight's press conference in Salem, MA provided the MVP of Super Bowl XLIX with an opportunity to offer both a mea culpa for what he did and a corresponding public apology, and further express his willingness to submit to an appropriate penalty as to be determined by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell.

    Instead, in front of an adoring audience of 4,000 Patriots fans -- many of whom were loudly chanting "MVP! MVP!" -- QB Tom Brady slammed shut that window, and by being so blasé about the charges being leveled against him publicly, he effectively flipped the bird to every NFL fan outside New England.

    While Brady may have been a real Mensch on the gridiron last February in rallying the Patriots from a 10-pt. 4th quarter deficit to a 28-24 victory over the Seahawks, he's certainly more than proved himself to be a true Putz off of it.

    So, here's hoping that Commissioner Goodell finally grows a pair, and brings a well-deserved hammer down upon both "Golden Boy" and the entire scheming New England organization.

    If Goodell really wants to deter future attempts by players, coaches and teams to skirt or flout the league's rules for personal advantage, he needs to ensure that such willful infractions won't ultimately be allowed to pay off over the long run.

    Personally, I think that a 6-to-8-game suspension for Brady, and forfeiture of his team's entire allotment of 2016 draft choices, would be a good starting point. After all, let's please remember that this is not the first time the Patriots have been caught cheating during Coach Bill Belichick's tenure.

    While the NFL can't undo the past, it can ensure that the Patriots' prior questionable practices finally catch up with them, and affects their immediate future accordingly.