RumRunner

Excellent job Krys! Thanks for adding that to the carbon cycle references. I have only one more thing to add (for now) which is the rarely mentioned contribution by coastal phytoplankton to the depletion of greenhouse gases and to their contribution to the carbon budget as well.... of course that is all well and good but too many of them and you have other nasty problems as well with red tides and hypoxia. Hypoxia is a loss of enough oxygen in the water for fish, etc to survive. This happens if there are large algal blooms (too much phytoplankton). When they die, like all carbon life forms, they oxydize, i.e. consume oxygen from the water. Phytoplankton live mostly in the top 3 meters of ocean - and - as if by coincidence that is where the majority of the oxygen is as a result of their respiration and consumption of CO2. So when they die - the process consumes the oxygen they have produced. If there is enough O2 loss it results in fish kill and can span large portions of the ocean based food chain - which then can affect portions of the land based food chain... most of us do eat fish after all.

Candles are not your best option. Other than by flying debris or drowning, a significant number of post hurricane deaths are attributed to being exhausted, and fallig asleep in a house with a lit candle. Belle's advice is excellent. You can also find excellent info at the National Hurricane Center http://www.nhc.noaa.gov It's also a good place for info updates on storm trajectory forecasts etc. Don't know why I typed all that without finishing reading Bell's post - she already pointed out NHC.... Hang in - unless they tell you to evac - then go along suggested routes - usually marked by blue signs with a white hurricane symbol on them. Sorry had to edit this for some grammar errors but also wanted to tell you that if the NHC site gets too busy you can get a lot of the same info at http://www.srcc.lsu.edu Best, RR

Thanks man - I'll be fine. Got too many good folk at GSC praying for me to not be fine. - grinnin' - just never did like to use emotes. Oops - umm sorry that was not a comment on ANYONE else using them; just me and my two hundred year old mentality. I'll tell ya about the carnival ride when I get back DM. Funny thing - junked TWI in 1987 - never thought about it until Groucho told me about GSC a few months ago. Didn't go into The Prayer Room much at first either... now it is a place a I spend a fair amount of time in. Probably a statement of my selfishness. It's always easy to ignore others needs until you have your own - but that should not be on this thread.

Now that I have blabbed all night I just now realized I never really addressed Belle's comment - which was watiing for my reivew. I simply gave my comments about climate variability without seeing the movie. Sorry Belle. And - well I will be on medical leave for a few weeks starting next Monday 24 Jul 2006 so I probably won't see it anytime soon. I'll hit this thread again when I am back in the saddle and have watched the movie if the movie is still around and the thread is still active. Hmm wonder if the mor..ine is gonna be fun. Regards, RR

Dmiller - your observations are sound - but 35 years is a long time in science. You probably noticed in my post that we still have VALID scientific controversy about the issues. And trust me I have barely touched on them but did not want to post some giant post that would just bore people to death from some California geek. Here's a couple of thoughts for you though which support neither side - which I hope does not annoy you - but just some obs. 35 years ago serious climatology was not quite infantile but certainly not sophisticated yet. Our long term observations were typically less than a hundred years old. Yes Yes I know the Chinese, among others, have river stage levels etc for a coupe of thousand years... I don't want to split hairs here - they were the giant exception because of certain rapid tidal changes in some rivers. 35 years ago (hmm makes you just a little older than me) we were in the cold war and a lot of climate science was focused on the result of nuclear war (nice thought that one is). Global warming as a concept was vague at best. I don't want to get into a discussion of politics in science but people who come to GSC undoubtedly know something about politics affecting truth/facts. I'll simply refer to my post above - certain evidence is there - the full mechanisms and full consequences are not yet accurately defined in any detail by any honest researcher

Goey, George and Galen (hmm the three G's) all posted good evaluations and/or comments about climate analysis to date. I do a fair amount of work in that area with satellite remote sensing in conjunction with the center for cloud physics at Scripps Institute of Oceanography in San Diego as well as the Naval Research Laboratory in both Monterey, CA and NRL at Stennis Space Center in Bay St Louis, MS. The evidence for global warming is clear. However the majority of the questions about both the mechanisms as well as consequences are still very unclear. Does mankind do things that contribute? Yes. but there is a pretty big but in there... no one has come close to determining that actual human contribution vs natural contributions. If people are contributing 3% and 97% is "natural" then we are screwed by nature. If we are contributing 40 - 50 - 60 percent then it is something we should take action on in the way we live. That being said, whether it is 3 or 60 I still don't believe in crapping in my own dishwaher - i.e. if it is only 3% that is no excuse to continue to contribute when alternatives are available. One of the big catch phrases which has been hammered into everyone's head is "greenhouse gasses." That is one of many many factors and some of those factors are switch hitters. There is also the carbon budget which strongly determnes the rate at which greenhouse gases are consumed. Atmospheric aerosol content is huge because it changes how much solar enegery reaches the earch's surface (think of a large wildfire where the sky is filled with smoke - not a lot of energy reaching us then...) Some of that energy will remain in the atmosphere and some will be reflected back into space. And since aerosol content is not uniform (although typically highest in urban and volcanic environments) it is almost impossible to model. Current aerosol modeling is almost exclusively over small geographic areas. Cloud physics is even testier - hence my comment about switch hitters. One school of thought believes that if we have complete (or near) cloud cover the earth will heat up... and some physics does indeed support that. Equally pedigreed models show that continuous cloud cover will reflect so much solar energy as to cause cooling (remember nuclear winter? same concept). Now here is a bit of a kicker on clouds... you can take an atmospheric physics model (if you are curious look up things like radiative transfer, MODTRAN, MM5, NOGAPS. COAMPS, atmospheric sounding, etc) tweak it ever so slightly and get either of those results - from the same model being touched just a little. Now put all that together with politics, sometimes shoddy research or politically driven research, mixed with honest efforts and you have a big case of not knowing enough to stand up and pontificate as so many do on either side. We are not at a place where we can say we understand it yet. A toddler knows he/she likes what mom and dad put into their mouth but they don't know how to cook. And on and on and on... OK - sorry for the tome... I'd still rather recycle than not - :)

Galen I have had GEICO in three different states for more than twenty years - they pretty much take the path of least resistance in each state and in fact in some states they use different underwriters (they also have my homeowners policy). It is probably not GEICO's issue - it is probably that the state of Maine has put in place some fine and dandy law about bikers and nukes - like anyone in a car would fair 1 shake better - well maybe they would 1 shake... but not 2. On the good side GEICO has always been responsive when the ex got into accidents. V/R

Heh - The Jolly Roger on Long Island - circa the same time - those great 60's - skee ball - pin ball and the biggest hot pastrami sandwhiches you could ever dream of. I know what you mean.

No debris left of this airplane.

Agreed Groucho - I know a liitle about this one.

It has flattened somewhat but by no means crashed. I feel the same way about SD housing as you do about SF. The 2600 sq ft brand new home we bought in 1997 for $275K sold 4 years later for $500K. Those same houses are now $800K

Beautiful - Thank you very much!

The de facto standard is two hundred words - after that, posters MAY (and no I am not a lawyer either) be subject to action.

Guess I am the lucky one here then - I live in San Diego and love it - but I sure love Monterey as well. You can keep LA and SF.

I don't know if Michigan has the equivalent of Megan's Law like CA does - but if it does you should check by zipcode - and if your child goes to a school in a zip code other than where you live double check - frankly I was amazed (probably should not have been after reading the FAQ's) at how many live close to schools and parks. http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov

Just a thought about why people left at that time - South Side was kind of a different story. No need to drill deeper.

OK - I will break the rule here of there are two kinds of people... There are three kinds of HR people 1 - employee advocates - always mean well but don't always make the right decision on how the company will succeed - which leaves everyone without a job 2 - Management advocates - always subscribe to management policy and will fire an employee at the drop of a hat and enjoy it - and damed if the company doesn't go down with it 3 - Real HR people who understand that they are best being part of an integral management team by promoting the skills of the employees I've interviewed dozens of them or even more - and that is thow they bin

[quote as far as coming in late, does anyone else get away with the same thing? Even five minutes late? In most states a salaried employee is considered "exempt" The abbreviated version is that for most exempt positions you don't get paid for overtime - but if you are not there 40 hrs or at 0800 or whatever and are still getting your job done you cannot be penalizsed. This one is a sticky issue; if you are not his supervisor or don't have solid evidence that he is not getting the job done you will not make a lot of headway with this one.

Rejoice probably gave you the best advice. If you have adequate documentation most states will not pursue a race or ethnicity issue. You should also make sure that you a) first take the documentation to yor HR. If nothing is done, most states have agencies that will do an indepdendant investigation. At our company when we make a new hire we tell them this loud and clear.

LOL - Howard came to Chicago in the early '80s - talked about toilet paper at an area meeting on the south side of Chicago - you can image how that went over. He also made this more than moronic comment - "Some of my best frieds are black" And this guy was BOT of a minstry that would save the world? Sorry ranting now

Nothing at all like CatCup or Dot - but at least this has a positive ending while following the thread. I am not posting this to make light of ANY of the pain others have posted here - just wanted to post a happy ending for at least one couple. Had two good friends - one was interim corps from early '80s who I knew from a few years before that. The other was just taking a job as full time National Guard after graduating college a little late. Both were/are great people. Ended up getting to know each other and as things would have it he proposed during her interm year. She was finishing her final year in residence when I got a call from Harvey Platig telling what has been echoed so many times here - he was not corps material. (Funny he retired as a full bird Colonel and spent a year in Desert Storm....) So Platig is being nice and gooey - you know - this leader to leader .... where there is some supposed inner sanctum of understanding. Problem is I was already on the snitlist for causing trouble at HQ and to make the "problem" worse these two were the perfect pair. So I kind of blew off Harvey. Fast forward - she graduates and comes to where we all were. In fact they lived with my ex-wife and me because they were still looking for solid employment. Harvey calls me again with some more .... about he wasn't corps material - short discussion ensues before I got impatient and told Harvey it was not his choice. Married 'em in a nice ceremony with lots of family and friends. They had a great time - he was cool in his dress blues and she could not have looked better. Fast forward another 20 years - they are married - still - with two great kids - left TWI in '87 when I did and have never looked back. We still stay in touch although somewhat randomly. So for all of the horrible pain expressed here I hope that this one is a little more... damn can't think of a good word that TWI didn't already compromise - let's just say postive outcome and leave it at that.

Perfect! Sure would be nice to see that on a billboard in Ohio.

I left in '87 as well - whenever that first clergy meetin was.

Jim Gibbons???