California's Fires

On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 8:50:15 PM UTC-7, Tim McNamara wrote:

Gotta get the hell out of the Twin Cities, which are aiming to go the
way of LA and NYC over the next 30 years. Used to be great places to
live but have been going downhill due to relentless pro-expansion
policies pushing sprawl out farther and farther. It's a minimum of an
hour's ride in any direction (a couple hours going west) to get out of
town and onto rural roads. Not all "growth" is good.

This is also a feature of the millennial politicians. Expansion regardless of what it does to the cost or quality of living.

In California it became so easy to illegally enter that most of the migrant workers who COULD have obtained Green Cards didn't bother. Now we have the entire state of California acting as a "sanctuary state".

Does this help these migrant workers? Not in the least. In ONLY helps convicted felons since the cops are not reporting the release from prison of these people to ICE.

What would have been much brighter would have been to develop an agency that would hurry immigration paperwork through. But that would have required thinking. And liberals are not known for that.

Liberals are socialists and that is a totally childish way of thinking. People who are not forced to work will not. So every socialism degrades into a dictatorship or oligarchy over fairly short periods. This refusal to work was shown dramatically in Venezuela when a socialist government was voted into power and almost the entire farm workers moved into the cities to get a free ride.

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 8:18:07 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 1:41:59 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 4:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Hmmmm.
http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/cali...g-worst-record


Funny you didn't feel the need to look further.

While the total amount of fires this year is about 170,000 acres inb a
total of 17 wildfires, those of the Laguna fire in 1970 was 175,000
acres and 382 homes.

Those of 1889 called the Santiago Canyon Fire covered 300,000 acres.

New York had a wild fire covering a half million acres. New Brunswick
had one in 1825 that covered three million acres.

But when you can demonstrate a legal mind I suppose you needn't
actually know anything.

NASA seems to disagree with you.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I'll put my money on
NASA.Â* They had to be super-smart to fake that whole moon landing thing.

Supersmart indeed:

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...erature-fraud/

NASA reports 3.2 mm of sea level rise per year.

Over a 50 year period the tidal gauge on the Battery in New York
showed the sea level presently lower than it was in 1940.

In San Francisco Bay the tidal gauges used since the 1880's show no
sea level changes.

In Seattle again the sea levels are below what they were in 1940.

In Baltimore the sea level is 1 mm below what it was in 1950.

"Every single thing NASA says about sea level is fraudulent. NASA’s
own data says that Antarctica ice growth is reducing sea level."

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

So you stick with NASA because they're really looking out for you.


Peshtigo Wisconsin Fi 1.5 million acres 2400 dead.

Jay's "worst fires on record in California" may have meant to exclude
Wisconsin.

And Jay was given a couple of examples of California fires that were MANY times larger. The 300,000 acre fire was one single fire while the loss of what will be 170,000 acres is 17 fires. There were just five in the wine country and surrounds.

From the Pall Mall Gazette 1971: "We have often noticed that in the tabular statements of those compilers of weather records who write to the Times, useful and welcome as their communications are, every season is sure to be “extraordinary,� almost every month one of the driest or wettest, or windiest, coldest or hottest, ever known. Much observation, which ought to correct a tendency to exaggerate, seems in some minds to have rather a tendency to increase it"

An absolutely PERFECT example of this mindset is Jay. He's cold today so it's the coldest day in history. He's hot today so he believes in the discredited theory of man-made global warming.

This was based upon a theory of Arrenhius from the last quarter of the 19th century and was seized upon by environmentalists from the 1980's. They made many claims about how the scientist had proven this and that through direct experiment.

I searched out his paper and it was written in German so I had to do a great deal of searching to find a translation. Guess what - he made NONE of the claims attributed to him. He made not one single experiment as he said he did not have the money nor space to do so. Instead his work was based upon another paper about the light reflected from the moon. He made well thought out observations but not one of them would support the man-made global warming theory. This was generated firstly by Dr. Michael Mann. Mann's work ("known as the hockey stick") counterfeited data so blatantly that a Canadian scientist called him on it. Mann made the stupid mistake of suing that scientist in a Canadian court for defamation of character. Apparently he thought that Canadian would withdraw. Suddenly faced with court Mann's legal staff asked for additional time to prepare their case since the Canadian scientist had ALL his ducks in a row. The Canadian's advisers agreed ONLY on the grounds that Mann supply the data he had in totality. The court so ordered.

Mann did not turn his records over. Ask Jay how the court will take this when they reconvene.

And the public documents Mann had been bandying about did not show two extreme climate events - the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than today -significantly so - and the little ice age. By taking these ghastly events out of the data he was free to predict these horrible climate events without anything to compare them with.

Since this time NASA and NOAA have been forcing most of their scientific staff to agree with Mann's papers in public. But the worm has long since turned. Scientists from all over the world are plainly saying that these two government entities have counterfeited data.

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

The article here shows how NASA has changed the data sets. Not a great deal mind you, but no change is legitimate unless they carefully explain why. And they have not.

If you read https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-at-ushcngiss/

You can see the extraordinary changes in the data from NASA.

While Jay is taking Seattle's "word for sea level rise" check this out:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-co...6-04-22-54.png

Slightly down the page is a picture of a rock outcrop in La Jolla, CA near San Diego. It shows high tide in 1871 and today. You will note that there is maybe a slight REDUCTION in sea levels. Now of course this could easily be manipulated by not showing the same moon generated tide levels, but that is unlikely since the date of both pictures is public knowledge.

As a sailor I could go into the science of tides in depth but it is significant that Jay is willing to make comments outside his area of expertise with such frequency.

The one outstanding feature of man-made global warming is that those who know the least science are those that speak of it the most.

I was a sailor, too (racing S35s in the '80s), but that doesn't give me any insight into global warming or changes in sea level. Look at the source of your information on the Puget Sound: "real climate science." Wow, what a scholarly operation that is. https://realclimatescience.com/ Another guy who claims to be smarter than God but is whining about not having a job.

I've also been to the Puget Sound about a million times. I was up there just a few weeks ago at the University of Washington. I'm an expert!

-- Jay Beattie.

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 9:14:10 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 8:18:07 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 1:41:59 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 4:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Hmmmm.
http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/cali...g-worst-record


Funny you didn't feel the need to look further.

While the total amount of fires this year is about 170,000 acres inb a
total of 17 wildfires, those of the Laguna fire in 1970 was 175,000
acres and 382 homes.

Those of 1889 called the Santiago Canyon Fire covered 300,000 acres.

New York had a wild fire covering a half million acres. New Brunswick
had one in 1825 that covered three million acres.

But when you can demonstrate a legal mind I suppose you needn't
actually know anything.

NASA seems to disagree with you.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I'll put my money on
NASA.Â* They had to be super-smart to fake that whole moon landing thing.

Supersmart indeed:

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...erature-fraud/

NASA reports 3.2 mm of sea level rise per year.

Over a 50 year period the tidal gauge on the Battery in New York
showed the sea level presently lower than it was in 1940.

In San Francisco Bay the tidal gauges used since the 1880's show no
sea level changes.

In Seattle again the sea levels are below what they were in 1940.

In Baltimore the sea level is 1 mm below what it was in 1950.

"Every single thing NASA says about sea level is fraudulent. NASA’s
own data says that Antarctica ice growth is reducing sea level."

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

So you stick with NASA because they're really looking out for you.


Peshtigo Wisconsin Fi 1.5 million acres 2400 dead.

Jay's "worst fires on record in California" may have meant to exclude
Wisconsin.

And Jay was given a couple of examples of California fires that were MANY times larger. The 300,000 acre fire was one single fire while the loss of what will be 170,000 acres is 17 fires. There were just five in the wine country and surrounds.

From the Pall Mall Gazette 1971: "We have often noticed that in the tabular statements of those compilers of weather records who write to the Times, useful and welcome as their communications are, every season is sure to be “extraordinary,� almost every month one of the driest or wettest, or windiest, coldest or hottest, ever known. Much observation, which ought to correct a tendency to exaggerate, seems in some minds to have rather a tendency to increase it"

An absolutely PERFECT example of this mindset is Jay. He's cold today so it's the coldest day in history. He's hot today so he believes in the discredited theory of man-made global warming.

This was based upon a theory of Arrenhius from the last quarter of the 19th century and was seized upon by environmentalists from the 1980's. They made many claims about how the scientist had proven this and that through direct experiment.

I searched out his paper and it was written in German so I had to do a great deal of searching to find a translation. Guess what - he made NONE of the claims attributed to him. He made not one single experiment as he said he did not have the money nor space to do so. Instead his work was based upon another paper about the light reflected from the moon. He made well thought out observations but not one of them would support the man-made global warming theory. This was generated firstly by Dr. Michael Mann. Mann's work ("known as the hockey stick") counterfeited data so blatantly that a Canadian scientist called him on it. Mann made the stupid mistake of suing that scientist in a Canadian court for defamation of character. Apparently he thought that Canadian would withdraw. Suddenly faced with court Mann's legal staff asked for additional time to prepare their case since the Canadian scientist had ALL his ducks in a row. The Canadian's advisers agreed ONLY on the grounds that Mann supply the data he had in totality. The court so ordered.

Mann did not turn his records over. Ask Jay how the court will take this when they reconvene.

And the public documents Mann had been bandying about did not show two extreme climate events - the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than today -significantly so - and the little ice age. By taking these ghastly events out of the data he was free to predict these horrible climate events without anything to compare them with.

Since this time NASA and NOAA have been forcing most of their scientific staff to agree with Mann's papers in public. But the worm has long since turned. Scientists from all over the world are plainly saying that these two government entities have counterfeited data.

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

The article here shows how NASA has changed the data sets. Not a great deal mind you, but no change is legitimate unless they carefully explain why. And they have not.

If you read https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-at-ushcngiss/

You can see the extraordinary changes in the data from NASA.

While Jay is taking Seattle's "word for sea level rise" check this out:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-co...6-04-22-54.png

Slightly down the page is a picture of a rock outcrop in La Jolla, CA near San Diego. It shows high tide in 1871 and today. You will note that there is maybe a slight REDUCTION in sea levels. Now of course this could easily be manipulated by not showing the same moon generated tide levels, but that is unlikely since the date of both pictures is public knowledge.

As a sailor I could go into the science of tides in depth but it is significant that Jay is willing to make comments outside his area of expertise with such frequency.

The one outstanding feature of man-made global warming is that those who know the least science are those that speak of it the most.

I was a sailor, too (racing S35s in the '80s), but that doesn't give me any insight into global warming or changes in sea level. Look at the source of your information on the Puget Sound: "real climate science." Wow, what a scholarly operation that is. https://realclimatescience.com/ Another guy who claims to be smarter than God but is whining about not having a job.

I've also been to the Puget Sound about a million times. I was up there just a few weeks ago at the University of Washington. I'm an expert!

And yet the same docks are being used and if the sea levels in the Sound had indeed risen six feet the docks would have to be raised for the fishing docks to unload their catches and for the commercial docks to LOAD and UNLOAD cargo since the heights until the 2000's were critical to the machinery.

I realize that you have a real problem facing any knowledge superior to your own on the most absurd subjects but you don't know what you're talking about from anything about Social Security to ocean tide levels. Sea levels in Florida have actually fallen. There was that photo

For instance - you GAVE that website that discussed Social Security and Medicare. But you didn't even bother to read it since it said that a family WITH AN AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS INCOME WOULD DRAW LESS THAN IT PAID IN TO SOCIAL SECURITY. That the differential was really from Medicare.

On 10/20/2017 10:07 AM, wrote:
... presently I'm considering a couple of jobs at very large firms that will again put me in the top 5%.

That's good news, Tom. I hope you land one of those jobs and move to a
better location. (Your present place sounds like a hell-hole.)

Good luck! And keep us posted.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 11:35:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 9:14:10 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 8:18:07 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 1:41:59 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 4:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Hmmmm.
http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/cali...g-worst-record


Funny you didn't feel the need to look further.

While the total amount of fires this year is about 170,000 acres inb a
total of 17 wildfires, those of the Laguna fire in 1970 was 175,000
acres and 382 homes.

Those of 1889 called the Santiago Canyon Fire covered 300,000 acres.

New York had a wild fire covering a half million acres. New Brunswick
had one in 1825 that covered three million acres.

But when you can demonstrate a legal mind I suppose you needn't
actually know anything.

NASA seems to disagree with you.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I'll put my money on
NASA.Â* They had to be super-smart to fake that whole moon landing thing.

Supersmart indeed:

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...erature-fraud/

NASA reports 3.2 mm of sea level rise per year.

Over a 50 year period the tidal gauge on the Battery in New York
showed the sea level presently lower than it was in 1940.

In San Francisco Bay the tidal gauges used since the 1880's show no
sea level changes.

In Seattle again the sea levels are below what they were in 1940..

In Baltimore the sea level is 1 mm below what it was in 1950.

"Every single thing NASA says about sea level is fraudulent. NASA’s
own data says that Antarctica ice growth is reducing sea level."

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

So you stick with NASA because they're really looking out for you.


Peshtigo Wisconsin Fi 1.5 million acres 2400 dead.

Jay's "worst fires on record in California" may have meant to exclude
Wisconsin.

And Jay was given a couple of examples of California fires that were MANY times larger. The 300,000 acre fire was one single fire while the loss of what will be 170,000 acres is 17 fires. There were just five in the wine country and surrounds.

From the Pall Mall Gazette 1971: "We have often noticed that in the tabular statements of those compilers of weather records who write to the Times, useful and welcome as their communications are, every season is sure to be “extraordinary,� almost every month one of the driest or wettest, or windiest, coldest or hottest, ever known. Much observation, which ought to correct a tendency to exaggerate, seems in some minds to have rather a tendency to increase it"

An absolutely PERFECT example of this mindset is Jay. He's cold today so it's the coldest day in history. He's hot today so he believes in the discredited theory of man-made global warming.

This was based upon a theory of Arrenhius from the last quarter of the 19th century and was seized upon by environmentalists from the 1980's. They made many claims about how the scientist had proven this and that through direct experiment.

I searched out his paper and it was written in German so I had to do a great deal of searching to find a translation. Guess what - he made NONE of the claims attributed to him. He made not one single experiment as he said he did not have the money nor space to do so. Instead his work was based upon another paper about the light reflected from the moon. He made well thought out observations but not one of them would support the man-made global warming theory. This was generated firstly by Dr. Michael Mann. Mann's work ("known as the hockey stick") counterfeited data so blatantly that a Canadian scientist called him on it. Mann made the stupid mistake of suing that scientist in a Canadian court for defamation of character. Apparently he thought that Canadian would withdraw. Suddenly faced with court Mann's legal staff asked for additional time to prepare their case since the Canadian scientist had ALL his ducks in a row. The Canadian's advisers agreed ONLY on the grounds that Mann supply the data he had in totality. The court so ordered.

Mann did not turn his records over. Ask Jay how the court will take this when they reconvene.

And the public documents Mann had been bandying about did not show two extreme climate events - the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than today -significantly so - and the little ice age. By taking these ghastly events out of the data he was free to predict these horrible climate events without anything to compare them with.

Since this time NASA and NOAA have been forcing most of their scientific staff to agree with Mann's papers in public. But the worm has long since turned. Scientists from all over the world are plainly saying that these two government entities have counterfeited data.

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

The article here shows how NASA has changed the data sets. Not a great deal mind you, but no change is legitimate unless they carefully explain why. And they have not.

If you read https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-at-ushcngiss/

You can see the extraordinary changes in the data from NASA.

While Jay is taking Seattle's "word for sea level rise" check this out:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-co...6-04-22-54.png

Slightly down the page is a picture of a rock outcrop in La Jolla, CA near San Diego. It shows high tide in 1871 and today. You will note that there is maybe a slight REDUCTION in sea levels. Now of course this could easily be manipulated by not showing the same moon generated tide levels, but that is unlikely since the date of both pictures is public knowledge.

As a sailor I could go into the science of tides in depth but it is significant that Jay is willing to make comments outside his area of expertise with such frequency.

The one outstanding feature of man-made global warming is that those who know the least science are those that speak of it the most.

I was a sailor, too (racing S35s in the '80s), but that doesn't give me any insight into global warming or changes in sea level. Look at the source of your information on the Puget Sound: "real climate science." Wow, what a scholarly operation that is. https://realclimatescience.com/ Another guy who claims to be smarter than God but is whining about not having a job..

I've also been to the Puget Sound about a million times. I was up there just a few weeks ago at the University of Washington. I'm an expert!

And yet the same docks are being used and if the sea levels in the Sound had indeed risen six feet the docks would have to be raised for the fishing docks to unload their catches and for the commercial docks to LOAD and UNLOAD cargo since the heights until the 2000's were critical to the machinery..

I realize that you have a real problem facing any knowledge superior to your own on the most absurd subjects but you don't know what you're talking about from anything about Social Security to ocean tide levels. Sea levels in Florida have actually fallen. There was that photo

For instance - you GAVE that website that discussed Social Security and Medicare. But you didn't even bother to read it since it said that a family WITH AN AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS INCOME WOULD DRAW LESS THAN IT PAID IN TO SOCIAL SECURITY. That the differential was really from Medicare.

You missed the point of the link -- which is at the end. Current benefits are being paid by current employees. When you paid into the system, you were paying for your parents. Here is some more from the ABA: https://www.americanbar.org/newslett...ex/kaplan.html You are stuck in Myth No. 1 -- that there is a magical savings account out of which you are receiving benefits. Sorry, man, but I'm paying your benefits.

-- Jay Beattie.

On 10/20/2017 7:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
Sorry, man, but I'm paying your benefits.

Hey, thanks, Jay!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 07:07:05 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 11:36:50 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Read up. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-paid-what-yo/ Your current benefits -- SS and Medicare -- are being paid by current wage earners, i.e., me. I'm supporting you. You are not supporting me. You are a drag on society. I am paying a staggering amount of taxes to support the efforts of the Trump administration because I am a team player! Go Team America! Do you hate the Team?

You certainly show yourself to be both a child of the 80's and financially incompetent as usual. Not to mention either your ability to bluff or absence of understanding what you read.

In all likelihood even under the inflated currency you will never earn half of what I did in your entire lifespan. And presently I'm considering a couple of jobs at very large firms that will again put me in the top 5%. And perhaps what is a more interesting position at a smaller start-up that is more in line with actually making breakthroughs.

You mean that you will be in the top 5% of wage earners in the U.S.?
According to the census bureau that is $214,492 a year, about $17,000
a month.
http://www.investopedia.com/news/how...ou-top-1-5-10/

And you whine about spending $50 for a steak?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/20/2017 7:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
Sorry, man, but I'm paying your benefits.

Hey, thanks, Jay!

You're welcome, comrade! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX06s49xbHQ

-- Jay Beattie.

On 10/20/2017 6:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 11:35:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 9:14:10 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 8:18:07 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 1:41:59 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/19/2017 4:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 10/19/2017 1:34 PM, wrote:
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:54:27 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:

Hmmmm.
http://www.wri.org/blog/2017/10/cali...g-worst-record


Funny you didn't feel the need to look further.

While the total amount of fires this year is about 170,000 acres inb a
total of 17 wildfires, those of the Laguna fire in 1970 was 175,000
acres and 382 homes.

Those of 1889 called the Santiago Canyon Fire covered 300,000 acres.

New York had a wild fire covering a half million acres. New Brunswick
had one in 1825 that covered three million acres.

But when you can demonstrate a legal mind I suppose you needn't
actually know anything.

NASA seems to disagree with you.
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I'll put my money on
NASA. They had to be super-smart to fake that whole moon landing thing.

Supersmart indeed:

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...erature-fraud/

NASA reports 3.2 mm of sea level rise per year.

Over a 50 year period the tidal gauge on the Battery in New York
showed the sea level presently lower than it was in 1940.

In San Francisco Bay the tidal gauges used since the 1880's show no
sea level changes.

In Seattle again the sea levels are below what they were in 1940.

In Baltimore the sea level is 1 mm below what it was in 1950.

"Every single thing NASA says about sea level is fraudulent. NASA’s
own data says that Antarctica ice growth is reducing sea level."

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

So you stick with NASA because they're really looking out for you.


Peshtigo Wisconsin Fi 1.5 million acres 2400 dead.

Jay's "worst fires on record in California" may have meant to exclude
Wisconsin.

And Jay was given a couple of examples of California fires that were MANY times larger. The 300,000 acre fire was one single fire while the loss of what will be 170,000 acres is 17 fires. There were just five in the wine country and surrounds.

From the Pall Mall Gazette 1971: "We have often noticed that in the tabular statements of those compilers of weather records who write to the Times, useful and welcome as their communications are, every season is sure to be “extraordinary,� almost every month one of the driest or wettest, or windiest, coldest or hottest, ever known. Much observation, which ought to correct a tendency to exaggerate, seems in some minds to have rather a tendency to increase it"

An absolutely PERFECT example of this mindset is Jay. He's cold today so it's the coldest day in history. He's hot today so he believes in the discredited theory of man-made global warming.

This was based upon a theory of Arrenhius from the last quarter of the 19th century and was seized upon by environmentalists from the 1980's. They made many claims about how the scientist had proven this and that through direct experiment.

I searched out his paper and it was written in German so I had to do a great deal of searching to find a translation. Guess what - he made NONE of the claims attributed to him. He made not one single experiment as he said he did not have the money nor space to do so. Instead his work was based upon another paper about the light reflected from the moon. He made well thought out observations but not one of them would support the man-made global warming theory. This was generated firstly by Dr. Michael Mann. Mann's work ("known as the hockey stick") counterfeited data so blatantly that a Canadian scientist called him on it. Mann made the stupid mistake of suing that scientist in a Canadian court for defamation of character. Apparently he thought that Canadian would withdraw. Suddenly faced with court Mann's legal staff asked for additional time to prepare their case since the Canadian scientist had ALL his ducks in a row. The Canadian's advisers agreed ONLY on the grounds that Man
n supply the data he had in totality. The court so ordered.

Mann did not turn his records over. Ask Jay how the court will take this when they reconvene.

And the public documents Mann had been bandying about did not show two extreme climate events - the Medieval Warm Period which was warmer than today -significantly so - and the little ice age. By taking these ghastly events out of the data he was free to predict these horrible climate events without anything to compare them with.

Since this time NASA and NOAA have been forcing most of their scientific staff to agree with Mann's papers in public. But the worm has long since turned. Scientists from all over the world are plainly saying that these two government entities have counterfeited data.

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-climate-data/

The article here shows how NASA has changed the data sets. Not a great deal mind you, but no change is legitimate unless they carefully explain why. And they have not.

If you read https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...-at-ushcngiss/

You can see the extraordinary changes in the data from NASA.

While Jay is taking Seattle's "word for sea level rise" check this out:
https://realclimatescience.com/wp-co...6-04-22-54.png

Slightly down the page is a picture of a rock outcrop in La Jolla, CA near San Diego. It shows high tide in 1871 and today. You will note that there is maybe a slight REDUCTION in sea levels. Now of course this could easily be manipulated by not showing the same moon generated tide levels, but that is unlikely since the date of both pictures is public knowledge.

As a sailor I could go into the science of tides in depth but it is significant that Jay is willing to make comments outside his area of expertise with such frequency.

The one outstanding feature of man-made global warming is that those who know the least science are those that speak of it the most.

I was a sailor, too (racing S35s in the '80s), but that doesn't give me any insight into global warming or changes in sea level. Look at the source of your information on the Puget Sound: "real climate science." Wow, what a scholarly operation that is. https://realclimatescience.com/ Another guy who claims to be smarter than God but is whining about not having a job.

I've also been to the Puget Sound about a million times. I was up there just a few weeks ago at the University of Washington. I'm an expert!

And yet the same docks are being used and if the sea levels in the Sound had indeed risen six feet the docks would have to be raised for the fishing docks to unload their catches and for the commercial docks to LOAD and UNLOAD cargo since the heights until the 2000's were critical to the machinery.

I realize that you have a real problem facing any knowledge superior to your own on the most absurd subjects but you don't know what you're talking about from anything about Social Security to ocean tide levels. Sea levels in Florida have actually fallen. There was that photo

For instance - you GAVE that website that discussed Social Security and Medicare. But you didn't even bother to read it since it said that a family WITH AN AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS INCOME WOULD DRAW LESS THAN IT PAID IN TO SOCIAL SECURITY. That the differential was really from Medicare.

You missed the point of the link -- which is at the end. Current benefits are being paid by current employees. When you paid into the system, you were paying for your parents. Here is some more from the ABA: https://www.americanbar.org/newslett...ex/kaplan.html You are stuck in Myth No. 1 -- that there is a magical savings account out of which you are receiving benefits. Sorry, man, but I'm paying your benefits.

-- Jay Beattie.


+1

Both Social Security and Medicare were arithmetically
impossible as founded. It got worse.

Then successive Congresses increased and expanded payouts
faster than they increased inputs, all the while using phony
language ( 'trust funds' or in one egregious example 'lock
box') to describe 'spending it as fast as the monies accrued'.

You don't get to twenty trillion in debt with just one
error, one program, one lapse.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 10/20/2017 6:52 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, October 20, 2017 at 4:38:14 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/20/2017 7:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
Sorry, man, but I'm paying your benefits.

Hey, thanks, Jay!

You're welcome, comrade! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX06s49xbHQ

-- Jay Beattie.



Leon Trotsky himself couldn't do this:

https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

Note the source.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971