text:
Page van der Linden | April 2, 2008
By Page van der Linden • Wednesday, April 2, 2008 - 23:05
Anyone who's ever surfed the AM radio airwaves has doubtless stumbled upon Rush Limbaugh, who is arguably the most well-known right wing talk show host out there.
Over the years, he has been a convenient megaphone for the climate change denier crowd. He has interviewed them, reinforced their rhetoric, been suckered by fake research, and even given his own interpretation of the facts (polar bears stranded on ice floes are "just playing").
Predictably, one of his latest targets has been Al Gore.
Last year, Limbaugh got out the popcorn, switched on the TV, and took notes on "Live Earth" for his audience, claiming that it was "an absolute disaster", and gloated that "[c]old weather and snow the week before kept people away from [the event in] Johannesburg,". Now, Limbaugh is repeating his "Live Earth was a failure" meme.
The proof (according to Limbaugh) is Al Gore's new bipartisan ad campaign to promote awareness of global warming awareness and action we can take. Here's what Limbaugh has to say.
He hits all the classic climate change skeptic talking points, and then some:
How much publicity has Al Gore gotten on his global warming movement? He's gotten more publicity than he could buy. He's got that movie of his, which, of course, played, and it got an Academy Award, which called more attention to it, and it was in movies. In south Florida and in other parts of the country, schoolchildren were being forced to watch his movie, An Inconvenient Truth. Now, apparently, the American people are either too dumb to get his message on global warming from his award-winning science fiction thriller, An Inconvenient Truth, so now he's gotta go out and spend an additional $300 million to try to propagandize them."
The sole purpose of this campaign of manmade global warming is to convince more and more Americans and citizens of the world to turn over more and more of their liberty to Big Government and to allow Big Government to have more and more control over private sector businesses. It's nothing more than a disguised government expansion program, typical liberalism."
Everybody wants to matter; everybody wants their life to have meaning. So if they can be fooled into thinking that they are going to pay for their carbon footprint, that that will help clean up the planet and prevent this destructive climate change, they'll be more than happy to do it. Meanwhile, the people who they're paying will be laughing all the way to the bank because it's just one of the biggest scams to come down the pike. The one thing about this that to me is encouraging is that Gore's movie didn't do its job and all the free publicity and all the propaganda did not do its job, otherwise there would be no need for this $300 million campaign." [Bold emphasis mine.]
A note to Limbaugh: you may persist in hoisting the bullhorn of blather, but you're in a shrinking echo chamber. The traditional media is finally recognizing the skeptics for what they are. And, there are folks on your side of the political fence who are teaming up with Al Gore to act on climate change.
Before long, you'll be talking to yourself, Rush.
Editor's Note: this is the first post of our newest DeSmog writer, Page van der Linden. Welcome to the team Page!
Troll replied on Permalink
OK, I get that you don't like Rush. I find him a bit annoying as well.
But can you point out what exactly he said that was not true?
And back it up?
Like it or not, The AGW thing crumbling away faster every day.
Soon it will just be a very embarrasing memory.
Too bad to. Cause a little warming would have been nice.
Carl S replied on Permalink
Course I have been hearing
Course I have been hearing this "crumbling away" business for the past 15 years since global warming has been a concern. Anything in science can be wrong, its why its a self correcting. Have to wonder though, if its been crumbling for the last 15 years why are the well respected scientific academies in every major industrial countery, and countless other scientific organizations all supporting the notion that human derived emissions of greenhouse gases have been increasing the global temperature, to paraphrase badly. If things are so crumbling, why are these great scientific instuitions and bodies not saying this is the case? Just because I like posting this list
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007
Joint science academies' statement 2007
Joint science academies' statement 2005
Joint science academies' statement 2001
InterAcademy Council
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
Network of African Science Academies
U.S. National Research Council, 2001
American Meteorological Society
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Astronomical Society
American Physical Society
Federal Climate Change Science Program, 2006
National Center for Atmospheric Research
American Association for the Advancement of Science
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
American Quaternary Association
Geological Society of America
American Chemical Society
Federation of American Scientists
Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia)
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
European Geosciences Union
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Geological Sciences
International Council for Science
European Science Foundation
lrbinfrico replied on Permalink
Why aren't any of the above
Why aren't any of the above listed oganizations refuting AGW? Hard to tell for sure, but one would have to serious question politics. All those organizations are political bodies. And there are some very respected scientists who disagree. But science isn't a popularity contest. It's about whether or not a given hypothesis can be substantiated completely by the data. More and more data is becoming available that seriously questions AGW. Even the data present only conforms loosely to AGW after some major arbitrary assumptions and manipulations. AGW is more based on faith that man is causing the change observed that in a theory that relies on solid data and independently repeatable experiments that show this to be the case.
Carl S replied on Permalink
None, these all support the
None, these all support the IPCC statement. There are no scientific bodies that dispute the main conclusion, though 2 are neutral in their overall statements. None of these organizations are political bodies, they have no political party affiliations, they are not governmental, and not privately funded by industry. They are collections of scientists. If you want a list of organizations refuting the human contribution to climate change, then look under business and industry funded political think tanks.
All of these academies and bodies have come out in support of a many scientific topics, stating their reputations and credibility on them like evolution, round earth and gravity. Do you know what a national academy of science is? Thus if you follow that train of thought, since science isn't a popularity content and these major organizations have so much to lose by endorsing "a hypothesis" why on earth would they do it?
Right….scientific bodies made of scientists, who's histories and reputations rest on good scientific judgment, pass out endorsements based on faith….sure, and Ball actually conducts research.
Nice try, though, it was quite amusing
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Man is inherently a political animal
Man is inherently a political animal. Where ever you have organizations of humans, you have politics. This is true in political parties, governments, companies, universities, cub scout packs, little league baseball teams, knitting clubs, and yes scientific societies. Politics is practiced on a wide scale by humans in all these organizations to gain power, authority, and/or influence. The statements released reflect the agendas and opinions of a select few members of the society who have successuflly gained authority, power, and influence. This may or may not also be congruent with the majority opinion of members of that society. And several of these societies do recieve significant funds from private industry and/or government entities, the American Meteorlogical Society being a prime example.
Reputations are just as much at risk by scientists who work for the think tanks you so disdain just as much as scientists who are members of scientific societies. There is nothing inherently different from the human norm in scientists that would exempt them from risking reputations to further political agendas. Just because a person is a scientist doesn't make someone more altruistic or truthfull than the average person.
Science is not a popularity contest. However scientists are still humans and are still vunerable to the need humans have to crave popularity and acclaim from their fellow humans. Just as all policemen aren't totally law abiding, nor do all clergy practice what they preach. Not all accountants follow the generally accepted accounting practices, and not all media adhere to the journalistic code of ethics.
And the statements that I've seen, appear to leave plenty of wiggle room if anthropogenic global warming is shown to be a total farse in the near future. Just like our elected government officials, scientists know how to use spin to CYA when they're proven wrong. No statement is saying that all members of the society are betting their entire professional credibility on AGW not being proven wrong. Far from it, most statements list tons of caveats like uncertainties in predicting climate, not knowing exactly how natural phenomenen will affect future climate, etc. These statements are little more that jumping on the political correct theory de juer while leaving lots of ambiguity to CYA incase this theory becomes politically incorrect.
Carl S replied on Permalink
I disagree as a person who
I disagree as a person who practices science to gain fame the only fame one can get is the standing in the scientific community. In a scientific sense this comes from the number of publications and the degree of impact they do have, i.e. ground breaking research. PR people are PR people, their fame comes not from practicing science but from overall public adoration and perception, I think there is a big contrast in those types of fame. In the public context being a famous scientist takes exceptional work, having high standing in the scientific community or fame if you will comes from many years of publishing results, ground breaking ideas, and significant impact within their own community. Is Dr. Tim Ball famous in the public sphere or the scientific community?
As a person who practices science, I don't agree that politics have any influence in good research. You study X, report on X. The implications of said research can lead to political issues however. Scientific understanding of climate, endorsed by all but 2 scientific bodies, as reported by the IPCC, is that humans are influencing climate by, landscape modification, greenhouse gas emissions etc. That isn't political, doing something about it is. The understanding climate on its own is not a political enterprise, it's not political that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, nor is understanding how it acts as a greenhouse gas, nor is methane political in how its role trapping heat works.
Rest assured I trust scientists living off of public grants, supported by universities and other public research intuitions a lot more than those funded by business interests or political think tanks. American and world wide researchers mostly from public intuitions showed that smoking and second hand smoke caused a number of health risks. Since that time there has been a concerted effort from business and political think tanks to conduct their own versions of science, misreport science to change the public perception of what the overall scientific consensus is on an issue in order to shape public action on a specific issue due to their own vested interests. Scientists who do work for those groups, are employed simply for one reason, for the good of the company. If you talk of bias in science, it comes from political think tanks and business interests, not from researchers, running their projects off their puny public grants and grad students living on 15k a year stipends.
Deniers for hire is a good way to make a living, just ask Dr. Singer who led one of the "scientific fights" to show no link between second hand smoke and cancer, or again how Dr. Singer leads in denying global warming ……..I'd say he is a famous person, has no scientific credibility but still captures media time, speaking fees and significant grants from business interests that love the things he says. Sadly though id say his standing in the scientific community for his great works on understanding climate is rather lacking.
Hey if you think groups like the Royal society or the National Academies only support something because its politically correct and the de jeur thing of the day, then go ahead….I am not going to be able to change your mind on how significant their endorsement is.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Carl, I respect you beliefs
Carl, I respect you beliefs and faith as I do everyone elses. But I see no empirical evidence in you argument as to why scientists who don't directly work for private industry and scientific society are exempt from human politics. They still have the human need and greed for money and public recognition. I've seen no research that all these people have an altruistic scientist gene in their DNA. Yes you belive and have faith and maybe you are one of the rare individuals who has very little influence from those factors.
I would ask you if you are so apolitical and tied to good scientific work, why then are you reduced to ad hominem attacks on Dr. Singer? Dr. Singer puts for scientific arguments not ad hominem ones. Why do the socalled scientist stoop to politics to critize their critics instead of answer with a better scientific argument? This alone seems ample proof to me that scientist are similarly affected by politics as political parties and corporate leaders.
Scientists have to be
Scientists have to be honest. If they lie about their results they will sooner or later be exposed as liars. Once they lose their credibility, they cannot practice as scientists in any effective way, because no one will believe their results.
The main reason for becoming a scientist is to learn about something and to figure out how it works. Scientists do not go to their labs expecting to prove that global warming is happening; they go expecting to figure out how a specific gas or liquid or organism works; why a certain kind of cloud behaves a certain way and not in a different way; or what causes a red blood cell to contract and what prevents it from doing so; or why some squirrels are more successful in life than others. Once they figure out how it works, then they think about how it fits into the larger picture; or if it doesn't seem to fit, why not.
The point is that science has to be based on the physical evidence, not on anyone's political or religious beliefs. If you don't understand this basic thing, you do not understand science.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Scientists are proven wrong
Scientists are proven wrong all the time. Einstein was no exception. Infact it was his theory of relativity that was the exception. Einstein was wrong on many other theories. So it's perfectly acceptable for a scientist to be wrong.
Now as to lying, that's another story. If a scientist came right out and and admitted that he'd lied extensively in his research, then he might face the end of his career. But political spin can change a lie to a mistake. Whose to know the difference? It is extremely rare for anyone to out and out lie in corporate America. Mostly it's just shading the truth in a certain direction. And that's more likely what you'll find in the scientific community.
As for becoming a scientist, everyone has their own reasons. Some that they freely admit and others that they may not even to themselves. But from the ones I've know personally, and that's quite a few, they had lots more reasons than to learn about something and figure out how it works. Most successful ones have fairly large egos, like successfully people in all walks of life.
And the argument is over whether human scientists are exempt from basic human foibles or not. The argument is not whether science is based on those same foibles, because it isn't. Or to put it another way, it's arguing whether clergy practice their religion fully or occasionally fail to do so because of their inherent human foibles. The Bible doesn't say thou shalt commit adultery, but how many Christian preachers have been caught doing just that.
Scientists are human. I don't see any empirical evidence to suggest that they are exempt to human weaknesses. I think that scientist can be just as flawed as the next man in their opinions. So the concentration should be on the empirical data and not the credibility of the scientists. We shouldn't give scientist the special status of ancient man's high priest to a pagan god. What the high priest says must be true because he'd never lie. If he was caught in a lie then he'd be killed by the masses. Yet it never seemed to stop the high priests from lying and manipulating people politically. Science is supposed to provide methods for us to independently assure that what the scientists are saying is true without having to just rely on them. Repeatable and predictible observations should show us the truth, not any consensus of scientists.
How exactly do you imagine
How exactly do you imagine scientists reached the consensus that AGW is occuring if not by repeatable and predictable observations?
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
1. I don't know that there
1. I don't know that there is a consensus amongl all scientists. I have seen no strong evidence to suggest that there is.
2. I would be willing to bet there are hundreds of stories about how scientists came to believe in global warming.
3. I have yet to see any evidence of repeatable and predictible observations to support AGW. There are lots of reports, papers etc. that lend evidence to support AGW. I'm not aware of any formula or model that has repeatably predicted the changes in climate in the future. Instead, I see the formula and models either have a huge +/- degree of accuracy or they post event attribut the results not matching to some variable that is not independently measurable.
I have faith in lots of things, but scientists always being right, even when in alleged consensus, isn't one of them. All I see is lots of data in the past which has been forced to match the theory using a lot of arbitrary assumptions. But the formula which matchs past data to AGW can't do so anywhere near as accurately in the future. Without the ability to accurate predict the future, it's a nice area to keep studying; but hardly worth betting the economy on.
Read the IPCC. When you say
Read the IPCC. When you say things like "I have yet to see any evidence…" you are simply demonstrating that you have not read much. Read Spencer Weart's online history. Read all the articles at Realclimate.
Ignorance is not a good basis for honest scepticism.
Jerry Smith replied on Permalink
I Don't Know That Their....
I think you have boiled it down to a short definition of a Skeptic.
I try to follow the statements put forth by the skeptical scientists and found that they reference data that is understandable and logical. The alarmists in my mind have faied to falsifie the Skeptical Scientists data and instead launch personal attacks on the Scientist, ususally by claiming he is on some industry payroll as if the alarmist Scientists don't get paid for by Governments in the form of Grants to do further research as long as it matches the Governments' agenda.
It seems to me that the Alarmists spout the same message over and over thinking that if it is repeated often enough it becomes factual.
It's a mystery to me that the IPCC does not recognize the role of the Sun in driving the climate.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
Why not cite some evidence for your claims?
lrbinfrico said: "And there are some very respected scientists who disagree".
Please tell us who you are referring to and cite some of their papers which they have published in the peer reviewed scientific literature. I bet it will be a very short list, if in fact you can even name one who has not been proven wrong.
Ian Forrester
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Ian, your questions appear
your questions appear to relect a serious flaw in logic. There don't have to be published papers on alternative theories to AGW in a peer reviewed scienific publications to show that there is not sufficient evidence to support the theory of AGW. All I said was there there were some well respected scientists that disagree that there there is sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion that AGW is correct. There are various theories that the sun might be causing most of the warming that we've seen in the last century. But there are no papers that conclusively prove nor disprove this. There is both evidence for and against this theory. Likewise there is evidence both for and against AGW. But we don't understand enough about the climate to conslusively prove nor disprove this theory.
And as for listing a couple of scientists off the top of my head, John R Christy and Roy Spencer from the University of Alabama Huntsville.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
OK , I know where you are coming from
lrbinfrisco said: "And as for listing a couple of scientists off the top of my head, John R Christy and Roy Spencer."
In case you don't know it these two "scientists" have lost all credibility they might have once had.
And as for your statement "There don't have to be published papers on alternative theories to AGW in a peer reviewed scienific (sic) publications to show that there is not sufficient evidence to support the theory of AGW".
You don't seem to understand how science works. Results get published in respected "peer reviewed" journals so that they can be discussed by other experts who will analyze the data and results. If there are no disagreements then the science is accepted and can be freely quot4ed as to being accurate and correct.
There is no evidence that disagrees with the thesis that the major portion of the current (last 150 years or so) global warming is being caused by anthropogenic influences.
As for the sun that has long been disproved as a contributor to global warming over the past 50 years.
See this link for the most up to date results on this.
Also for more information Google the scientists involved.
Ian Forrester
Troll replied on Permalink
Gee Ian. Michael Mann is probably the most discredited scientist in the industry, and you guys still listen to him.
Al Gore has been legally discredited by the British courts and you still listen to him.
James Hanses has be publically discredited and you still listen to him.
Bottom Line: Desmog is a Smear site. It exists mainly to smear respected scientists in a lame attempt to render their opinions mute.
There is little point in even discussing credibility on this blog.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
Not with someone as ignorant of the facts as you
You are right for once, there is no point in discussing the science of AGW with some one as ignorant and biased as you. Just what sort of a life do you have that you do not feel responsible for your actions and how they could adversely affect millions of lives?
You are not worth chatting with. Go find a blog that deals in the useless slime that you seem to want to discuss.
Ian Forrester
Troll replied on Permalink
Touched a nerve I see.
truth sting a bit there Ian?
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
You don't know what truth is
You truly do not have a clue. How do you manage to get to work every morning, does someone leave large arrows on the street to guide you.
You are just ignorant of anything to do with science.
Ian Forrester
rob replied on Permalink
Ian Forrester On Ignorance
Just the tip(!) of the ice-berg:
"…what an ignorant person you are."
"… lying, ignorant and offensive people like you."
"These ignorant trolls …"
"… how ignorant the AGW deniers are."
"… you are even more ignorant than I thought."
"… ignorant trolls like you …"
"… an ignorant coward."
"You are one ignorant and disgusting person."
"… such an ignorant troll …"
"… stupid, ignorant and demeaning …"
"… many equally ignorant people …"
"… how ignorant you are …"
"… you are pathetic and ignorant of science too."
"… You are either lying or are very ignorant of the science."
"… how ignorant of the whole area you are …"
"… that ignorant Senator …"
"… unintelligent and ignorant …"
etc., etc. …
Carl S replied on Permalink
Well you are ignorant, I
Well you are ignorant, I mean you cant accept that greenhouse gases act like greenhouse gases. That a significant increase is CO2 is caused by human activities and that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Its pretty basic stuff. If thats not ignorance I am not sure what is
Rob, there is help for
Rob, there is help for people who are ignorant. The process is called "learning". You should try it.
Jerry Smith replied on Permalink
Not with someone as ignorant of the facts as you
Thwere you go with the mantra……….
Richard Littlemore replied on Permalink
Legally discredited?
If you read the actual court judgment, rather than the denier press coverage of same, you would see that the UK judge endorsed Gore's film as credible, fair and worthy of presentation to UK school children.
Which is to say that the people who launched the suit trying to get The Inconvenient Truth thrown out of British schools LOST THE CASE.
That's no smear - though it is periodic pleasure to "smear" the sort of disingenuous scoundrels who who so consistently misrepresent this kind of information. It is, instead, a fair and documented fact. You might even call it "the truth" - however inconvenient you find it.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Where are the examples?
Ian, you asked for examples from me for the respected scientists I sited who disagree with that the IPCC AGW theory has sufficient scientific evidence to base drastic governmental policy on it, and I gave you examples. You reply with dismissing the credibility of my examples without siting why. Can you show examples of why you don't consider them credible scientists? What is your objective criteria to be considered a credible scientist?
Ian you wrote: "You don't seem to understand how science works. Results get published in respected "peer reviewed" journals so that they can be discussed by other experts who will analyze the data and results. If there are no disagreements then the science is accepted and can be freely quot4ed as to being accurate and correct."
I don't think that you are understanding what I'm saying. If a scientist does research, writes a paper, and has it reviewed by a small subset of his peers, and then has it published in a respected scientific publication; another scientist doesn't have to write a paper to criticize the 1st scientist's research. The the experients were flawed or the data was flawed or even if the conclusion's scientific logis was flawed, a peer scientists would have amble ground to disagree with the findings without publishing a paper of his own just to show his disagreement.
Ian wrote: "There is no evidence that disagrees with the thesis that the major portion of the current (last 150 years or so) global warming is being caused by anthropogenic influences."
Actually there is evidence that would put this into question. The inablility to accurrately repeat the results in future experiments is the single largest and most important IMO. We cannot predict future climate even given measurements of all the known and measurable major factors. Certainly reasons are given post fact as to why we didn't see the expected results. But the very fact that we aren't seeing the expected results, is proof. A 2nd proof is that we don't have measurements of all the major factors. Cloud cover and composition, deep ocen temperature, and others are lacking. There are major portions of the climate that we simply don't have a very firm understanding of.
And I have not seen any proof to show that there is no way that the sun is causing a large portion of the warming that we have seen. Now I have seen research that casts doubt on certain theories of the sun influencing a major portion of the warming observed. I would certainly agree that there it can be proven with a high degree of certainty that the sun is causing the major portion of the warming that we have seen. Like AGW, I don't think that we have the understanding of how the climate works to definitively say that the majority of the warming is caused by any single factor.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
Please write in intelligible English and I will try and answer
The above post is almost completely undecipherable. Please take the time to write in correct English otherwise your comments are meaningless.
Why are all of you deniers so lacking in basic writing and comprehension skills?
How long did you spend in school? Obviously not long enough. You may scoff at me but your gross mistakes are an insult to anyone who you expect to read your work.
Ian Forrester
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Why the peronal attacks?
Ian, I am more than a little disappointed that you resort to ad hominem attacks for your response. This is a tactic that I see used far too often by all sides of this argument. I had judged you to be a better person than to attempt to sidetrack intelligent debate with an unprovoked personal attack.
I will rephrase my response using more simplistic language in the hope that you might be able to comprehend it. I will also run the reply through a grammar and spelling program in an attempt to assuage you apparent inability to see past minor errors in the writings of others. However, I cannot be so presumptuous to claim that this response or any future response will be grammatically error free, nor can I promise that you will find them perfectly comprehensible. In the future if there are parts of one of my responses that you cannot comprehend, I would ask in the interests of promoting civil discourse on the topic of AGW that you confine your responses to peaceable requests for restatement or further explanation.
I had asked you for evidence to support your assertion that they were completely lacking in scientific credibility. This is a very bold and potentially libelous accusation of two highly educated researchers with prominent positions in academia and government. It does not seem unreasonable to me to ask for evidence to back your position.
The next part of my response was in reply to you following statement. "You don't seem to understand how science works. Results get published in respected "peer reviewed" journals so that they can be discussed by other experts who will analyze the data and results. If there are no disagreements then the science is accepted and can be freely quot4ed as to being accurate and correct."
I agree that the Scientific Method is based upon publicizing scientific research in order to have it reviewed and critiqued by the researchers' peers. In contemporary scientific practice, using journals to publicize research is by far the most prevalent method of accomplishing the goal of peer review. However, it is not the only accepted method. Additionally, simple publication in a peer reviewed journal does not mean that the research is accepted as absolute truth. The goal of the publication is to invite criticism of the research in hopes poking holes in it. At no time in the future is it too late to offer criticism. Also, it is not necessary to create a formal research paper and have it published in order for criticism to conform to the Scientific Method.
A good example of this type of behavior can be found in the field of software engineering. Best practices in software engineering call for a peer review of all artifacts of a software project. A programmer need not write a replacement program in order to offer criticism of a peer's program. Additionally, a person does not need a formal education in programming in order to point out a logical or syntactical flaw in a peer's work. Either a program is correct or it is not. Likewise either research and the conclusions derived from said research follow the Scientific Method or they don't. It is not necessary to reproduce an error free similar research product to correctly point out a flaw in someone else's research.
Ian, you wrote the following assertion. "There is no evidence that disagrees with the thesis that the major portion of the current (last 150 years or so) global warming is being caused by anthropogenic influences."
The apparent inability of scientists to accurately predict near term climatic changes is ample evidence current scientific understanding of the forces causing climate change is not sufficient to say definitively what has caused observed warming in the last 150 years. Current AGW theory is dependent on several arbitrary assumptions that have been programmed into computer models to make past observations conform to the theory. Chief among these assumptions is the concept that CO2 forces positive feedbacks in the climate that greatly amplify the effects of the CO2 in warming the climate. Resent satellite date on cloud formations calls this positive feedback mechanism into question. This and other evidence collectively do not absolutely eliminate the possibility of AGW. Neither does that AGW absolutely eliminate the possibility of natural forces being responsible for recent warming. Because science has not been able to accurately predict climate changes because of inadequate understanding of all climatic forces and how they interact together, we can't be certain or even reasonably assured what are the major driving factors in recent global climate change.
Zog replied on Permalink
LRB, why had you judged Ian
LRB, why had you judged Ian to be a "better person"? If you had been around here for awhile you'd be well aware that he is a grunting, snuffling knuckle dragger. Any respectable blog would have banned him long ago but, on DesmogBlog he fits right in.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Heretofore, Ian has confined
Heretofore, Ian has confined his communications with me to civil debate. I sincerely hope that he returns to this form of communication. The internet makes it far to easy to resort to juvenile name calling and personal attacks. The subject of AGW especially seems to draw this behavior from those who participate in discussing it. I can't say that I'm always perfect in this aspect in my postings on the internet either. However, I would hope that all of us would make an effort to bring more mature and respectful language and to our responses.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
There are reasons my replies are so critical
Firstly, most deniers are very loose with the English language which is, to be honest, an insult to their readers. It shows a lack of respect and critical thinking. If you want me to read your responses then please take the time and care to ensure that they are not filled with grammatical and spelling errors. You will be taken far more seriously if you do.
Secondly, if you appear to support the likes of ZOG, Troll, Rob, johnnyb and other trolls who have nothing useful to say, then you will be treated in the same manner as I treat these despicable people. They are not interested in finding out and understanding what is going on in climate science (or any other science for that matter, they are anti-science idiots) then you will be lumped in with them.
Thirdly, for all I know since you use some ridiculous name you may be one of them using a sock puppet.
Fourthy, you keep repeating the nonsense about all "the respected scientists" who are opposed to AGW. There are NO RESPECTED SCIENTISTS who oppose AGW. The majority have been shown to be either mistaken (Lindzen's iris theory) or are out and out liars. I'm sure you know who I am referring to since you continually bring up their names when it has been shown again and again that their honesty is suspect. This proves that you are either completely ignorant of what is going on with the science of AGW or you are lying too. I'll let you be the judge of that.
Ian Forrester
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Ian, your response above
Ian, your response above exemplifies some of the worst behaviors that I've encountered in posters to blogs regarding AGW. I am disappointed that you chosen to respond in such a rude and immature manner in lieu of engaging in rational debate.
If AGW does prove to be true and any of the catastrophic predictions come about, you can look primarily in the mirror when assessing blame. It will be you and those like you who seem to care more for stroking their own ego than in taking the time civilly discuss the issue.
You appear to be more a pompous popinjay concerned primarily in lording your supposed intellectual superiority as evidenced in believing in AGW. And yet you make the most basic and foolish mistakes in your postings. Case in point, would be you incredible display of hypocrisy in your post above. You spend the entire first paragraph ranting about your anal retentive need for others to post grammatical and orthographically correct postings so as not to insult your personal sensibilities. And yet you begin your fourth paragraph with the word "Fourthy" which has no meaning in the English language. Any spell checker program would have caught this error. It is rude beyond believe to so arrogantly demand such a lofty standard of others, but not even to make the most minimal efforts to achieve that standard yourself.
The issue of AGW has been politicized and polarized by behavior similar to yours. Sadly this has become especially prevalent in the public communications by the leaders of the AGW movement. Ad hominem attacks appear to have replaced rational arguments as the first line of defense in responding to scientific skepticism. Not that there is not improvement that could be made on the side of those who are skeptical of AGW. The sentiment that those on the other side are complete idiots unless they agree with my beliefs is all too prevalent. Basic respect and social courtesies need to be extended to the other side if we hope to reach a resolution to this issue and not create a costly boondoggle that will not benefit society at all.
And just for your information, my so called "ridiculous" name is simply the first part of my email address at Google which is made up of my initials combined with the city I live in. Maybe if you were not so set on throwing verbal stones, you could have taken the time and asked for an explanation.
Should you reconsider and wish to rationally discuss the issue of AGW, I would welcome doing so with you. But until that time, I do not feel that further debate on an emotional level will be productive of any positive outcomes.
Intelligent people get
Intelligent people get annoyed with those who insist on retaining their invincible ignorance. Ian's frustration is perfectly understandable, especially considering the piggish behaviour of Zog and the other trolls here.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
It is neither intelligent
It is neither intelligent nor mature to respond with abject rudeness to someone who has done nothing to provoke such an attack. Though my neighbor might kick my dog and give me a rational reason to become angry, it is totally illogical for me to take that anger out on you. A mature person accepts responsibility for their actions and apologizes when they make mistakes.
You have done something to
You have done something to provoke an attack. You make ignorant statements and you refuse to learn to be less ignorant.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Essentially what you're
Essentially what you're saying is that I am ignorant because I don't believe as you do and that I refuse to change my beliefs to conform to yours. That is an example of intolerance. This is certainly indicative of uncivilized behavior. Even if you find another person's beliefs to be totally absurd, that is no excuse to resort to rude and immature behavior. Even if you are right, you still appear to be a total ass; and if you are proven wrong, you look even worse.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
You are both ignorant and arrogant
You have shown that you know nothing about the science of climate change but you boast about how all the scientists have got it wrong. What gives you the right to be so arrogant. No wonder I treat you with utter contempt, that is all you deserve. You are definitely part of the problem, not part of the solution as you so erroneously think.
You are nothing but an arrogant and ignorant anti-science fool who is backing the large companies who are on a course to make the lives of many millions of people unbearable. Does that make you feel proud?
Go back to the rock you crawled out from under. You have shown that you are no better than the other trolls who infect this blog and add nothing but confusion and nonsense to the discussion of global warming.
I am not going to waste any more of my time responding to your foolishness and nonsense. I'm sure others will feel the same.
Ian Forrester
Jerry Smith replied on Permalink
You are both ignorant and arrogant
More mantra………………..
Hugh Campbell replied on Permalink
"All I said was there there
"All I said was there there were some well respected scientists that disagree that there there is sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion that AGW is correct."
Bully for them. Let them pursue their theories and share them with the world, and I do hope they are proven right. In the meantime, what is really at issue is the _probability_ that AGW is occuring, given the evident magnitude of the impacts were it actually so. This is basic risk management. Now please step aside so we can take some action.
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
The magnitude of global
The magnitude of global cooling is far more severe than that of AGW. And the true probability of each occurring is about the same, unknown. We just don't have the understanding of the climate to accurately predict the probability of either within the next century. The prudent thing to do is keep studying and refining our knowledge, but not to take any drastic action either way.
What evidence do you have
What evidence do you have for this statement: "The magnitude of global cooling is far more severe than that of AGW."
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
What evidence do I have.
What evidence do I have. Well I'm pulling from most of the scientific reports that I've seen on the ice ages, including even the little ice age though not nearly as severe here. Much harder to grow crops and more costly for man to adapt. The historical record shows that at one time England had vineyards and Greenland was good for growing crops. Even with all the warming we've seen so far that isn't happening.
Do you also write as JohhnyB? You guys are still stuck in the old debunked arguments.
(1) England STILL HAS VINEYARDS (and I have seen palm trees growing in a place called Plockton in the highlands of Scotland – want to see my holiday snaps?).
(2) There are still arable areas in Greenland – do a little checking on this before exposing yourself as someone who believes everything s/he reads.
Fern Mackenzie
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
Never heard of Johnny B. And
Never heard of Johnny B. And I should have written wide spread growing of vineyards in England.
I have yet to see any substantial argument that we'd be better off with a new ice age than with AGW as predicted by the IPCC.
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
Utter rubbish
You haven't a clue what you are talking about. There is no evidence for arable crops in Greenland when the Vikings inhabited it. They had livestock which they fed poor quality forage including sea grasses and sea weed. They did not grow crops as you seem to think.
Check out the evidence found in the middens from their settlements. They probably grew some kale and other similar vegetables in small plots but no arable farming as you are claiming.
Ian Forrester
lrbinfrisco replied on Permalink
I cannot prove definitively
I cannot prove definitively that large arable farming. Neither can you definitively prove that the Viking settlers were not able to grow sufficient crops to be self substaining. What I contend is that there is evidence in the historical record to support the assertion that climate was substantially warmer that the contemporary climate. The complete comprehensive evidential record is not without conflict and certainly not conclusive on either side of the argument. However, personally I give greater credibility to the historical record of widespread warming not only in Greenland but throughout Europe as well. I wouldn't bet my house on it, but would consider a lesser amount.
Zog replied on Permalink
The Greenland settlement
The Greenland settlement flourished for a couple of centuries but Knuckledragger wants to believe that it was some sort of subsistence operation because that fits into his pea-sized brain. People struggling to survive don't build sustantial stone buildings or maintain regular communications and trade with older settlements.
The Greenlanders probably had no wheat but they sure as hell grew rye and barley
Ian Forrester replied on Permalink
Where is your proof?
ZOG said: "but they sure as hell grew rye and barley."
Provide unequivocal proof and I will accept your premise. Otherwise you are only dealing in fairy tales.
Ian Forrester
Troll replied on Permalink
I tried to post a list of links like yours here once.
It was links to many of thousands of scientists that disagree.
It was blocked.
Agenda perhaps?
Because it's spam
Mindlessly throwing out lots of links is spam.
And blocking spam isn't censorship.
(By the way, I'm sure your big long "list" of links comes from only a few select places.)
Frank Bi, http://tinyurl.com/yrpnmd
"Al `Fat Al' Gore [is fat]" – Harold Pierce


text:
- Home/
- Our Trips/
- Photo Gallery/
- Mountain Bike Tours/
- Gooseberry and Zion Weekend/
- Gooseberry Weekend Spring/FallTrip
Specializing in western North America, Escape Adventures is a leader in first-class eco-friendly cycling and multi-sport adventure. In 2006, we became the world's first carbon neutral outfitter, bringing sustainable adventure to all the places we visit, from Alaska to Belize and beyond. By simply joining a tour with us, outdoor enthusiasts are now helping to preserve the beautiful backcountry areas they enjoy.

subset: commoncrawl


text: The acceptance stage, and if you've seen much of this condition. Although circumstances vary based on my pillow after waking up everyday to determine how best to consult a doctor or your hair loss treatment in the past, this problem is a compound in apples, has been approved by the FDA. The DHT will block DHT is high in fat, yet high in items like. As a 60% effectiveness rate, but alas as all good examples of food that lack of self-confidence when confronted with hair loss remedy. Other than the male pattern baldness - but research speculates that it deserves you will know that we could about hair loss industry has worked in the USA respectively.


text:
Posted in architecture, historical, landmark, weekend Tags: arches, fun, history, landscaping, light, Mission San Jose, rock, San Antonio Mission Trail, San Antonio Texas, spanish architecture, stone arches, weekendville
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 141 other followers
Blog at WordPress.com.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.


text:
Does Microsoft care?
By alexismp on août 24, 2004
Many seem to report significant increases in non-IE browser usage. As an end-user I've been using Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox on Windows for what seems like ever and lately had to use IE to access some odd web site (changing the user-agent wouldn't work). I was amazed to see that IE was where I left it years ago. Now, I sure it has been updated for security issues and brought up to the latest standards (XSL, DOM, etc...) but nothing for the end-user (tabs, ad-blocker, etc.).
So I'm asking myself, why should Microsoft care? While IE is not what could bring people to Windows, it is certainly what keeps them using this OS. I believe the vast majority of end-users have no idea that they could use an alternate browser (or mail client btw). As always, if something has to change significantly, it needs to first happen inside companies. So while obviously, users of Java Desktop System use Mozilla, I don't see (yet) companies going away from Internet Explorer on Windows, which to me would be the greatest sign of change.


text:
> I have a very strange problem with a UDP socket and recvfrom(). I
> want to use it to read-out data from an FPGA and it should work
> under both Linux and Mac OS X (currently I'm testing it on an intel
> Mac OS X 10.4.10). While I have no problems creating and binding the
> socket, I somehow never receive any data on it, even though I'm
> clearly sending valid UDP packets to it (I verified this with
> ethereal) and the socket is definitely open and listening (checked
> with netstat). It doesn't matter whether I have the socket in
> blocking or non-blocking mode either. As I haven't implemented the
> UDP checksum on the FPGA side but set it to zero (which is clearly
> allowed in the RFC) I thought that this might be the problem, but I
> tried listening on port 53 (DNS) with exactly the same results.
Were you sure that something was sending port 53 traffic to your IP?
And that it had a valid checksum?-)
Have you also checked netstat statistics to make sure that there isn't
some correlation between the number of no-checksum UDP datagrams
arriving and errors being reported?
Does MacOS X 10.4.10 make use of checksum offload features of the
NIC(s)? Linux (2.6 at least) will. IIRC Linux still wants datagrams
with "checksum failures" to flow up the stack, but perhaps the NIC
under MacOS X has been told to do the actuall checking and dropping
rather than just calculate? If there is a way to disable CKO
(assuming it is on) on OSX you might do that. Do the same thing on
the Linux boot.
> Doing some googling I found a lot of code snippets which look pretty
> much the same as mine, so by now I'm somewhat running out of ideas
> (and unfortunately it's not just my firewall blocking the port, I
> specifically opened it...) and hope that maybe someone here might be
> able to help me out.
> So here's what I'm doing in my code:
> ....
> int sockID;
> struct sockaddr_in serv_addr, cli_addr;
> char rxmsg[MAXMESG];
> int clilen,n;
> // create socket
> if ((sockID = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0)) < 0) {
> cout << "socket couldn't be created, exiting..." << endl;
> return -1;
> }
> bzero((char*)&serv_addr, sizeof(serv_addr));
> serv_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
> serv_addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY);
> serv_addr.sin_port = htons(RXPORT);
> // bind socket
> if (bind(sockID, (struct sockaddr *)&serv_addr, sizeof(serv_addr)) <
> 0) {
> cout << "socket couldn't bind, exiting..." << endl;
> return -1;
> }
> int optval = 1;
> setsockopt(sockID, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVLOWAT, &optval,
> sizeof(SO_RCVLOWAT));
> fcntl(sockID, F_SETFL, O_NONBLOCK);
For grins, drop the SO_RCVLOWAT call.
> FILE *rxdata;
> rxdata = fopen("fpgadata.test","w");
> int pktcnt = 0;
> char cmd;
> while(pktcnt<20) {
> // listen on port & dump to file
> cout << "waiting for data" << endl; // for testing only
> clilen = sizeof(cli_addr);
> n = recvfrom(sockID, rxmsg, MAXMESG, 0, (struct sockaddr
> *)&cli_addr, (socklen_t*)&clilen);
What does a system call trace tool say about the parameters you are
passing on the recvfrom call?
> cout << "bytes recvd: " << n << endl; // for testing only
> if (n > 0) {
> fputs(rxmsg,rxdata);
> pktcnt++;
> }
> }
> close(sockID);
> ....
> Thanks a lot & Cheers,
> Michael
rick jones
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...


text:
rogerfederer.com - Rome
Navigation with Access Keys
- [Alt + 0] - Startseite
- [Alt + 1] - Navigation
- [Alt + 2] - Inhalt
- [Alt + 3] - Kontakt
- [Alt + 4] - Sitemap
- [Alt + 5] - Suche
Language menu
© getty images
13.05.2013 | Tennis, Starseite 1
After a first round bye, Roger will either play Radek Stepanek (ATP 48) or Potito Starace (ATP 305) in Rome. He could later meet Tommy Haas (ATP 13), Gilles Simon (ATP 17), Mikhail Youzhny (ATP 31) or Filippo Volandri (ATP 117) in the round of the last 16. In the quarters, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (ATP 8) would be a likely opponent, before playing Andy Murray (ATP 3) or Juan-Martin del Potro (ATP 7) in the semis. A clash with Novak Djokovic or Rafael Nadal would only be possible in the final.
Good luck for your second round match against Potito Starace from Italy. All the best tennis for you.
practice attacking nadal's serves which is his weakness make nadal's service game like it's your service game lol...it's that easy...keep watching good matches against nadal and trying to figure out to beat him or make him troubled....I love you...I will always support you Roger!!! you can do it!
practice of returning his weak serves.... serves are nadal's weakness...eventhough he rarelly makes mistake with his serve. his serve is slow but tricky to your backhand. so you gotta practice of returning attack his weak tricky serve. you attack his serve right away with your backhand! his serve is really weak. it will eventually playing with nadal very very easy for you....rest your talent will take care....every game is trying to figure out your comfortzone than conditioning
you can slice it to his backhand side roger if you feel like to...he will respond with slice. from there, execute or send another unexpected tricky shot to either sides... roger make your comfort zone against nadal or other players.... do not mix up too many times against nadal...just depend on your comfortzone most of the time and mix up to confuse him. watch djokovic vs nadal 12aus final highlight until you figure the idea of main tactic which will be your comfort zone.
Roger! the reason Nadal is a little hard to beat is because his defensive skill... His mentality is he is gonna return even the hard balls to tricky side, so you gotta absorb that skill too, return it to tricky side of nadal too that he gotta run or his backhand which is his weakness. you don't have to hit hard all the time. mix up well with hard fast shot and slow free of error shot to the tricky place which is the very side of the court. you can slice to his backhand side never slice it foreha
Go Roger!
You're the best yesterday, today and all time
You're the best yesterday, today and all time
Dear Roger,
I love you and always have you in my prayers.
You're my forever Number ONE and I will never stop supporting you.
Good luck in Rome.
I love you and always have you in my prayers.
You're my forever Number ONE and I will never stop supporting you.
Good luck in Rome.
Good Luck, Roger! I know that you take one match at a time and this is very wise. I sure miss you and will be watching you in Rome.
Keep positive and focused
Keep positive and focused
THANKS FOR SUPPORTING ROGER, and me too.
THANKS FOR SUPPORTING ROGER, and me too.
STAY WITH ROGER - I KNOW YOU MEAN WELL. Roger needs you and all of us.
STAY WITH ROGER - I KNOW YOU MEAN WELL. Roger needs you and all of us.


text:
STOCKTON - New public art is brightening downtown Stockton. An unveiling was held Thursday afternoon at Janet Leigh Plaza to mark the occasion.
Three students and a professional artist recently painted the murals they designed onto four downtown utility boxes, an effort that came at no cost to the city.
The mural designs were the result of a competition held by the Downtown Stockton Alliance and the Stockton Mural Art Resource Team, or SMART. Local student artists were invited to contribute public art to the city.
The winning designs were by professional artist Michael Oliva, a San Joaquin Delta College instructor, and students Chris Seagram (Weston Ranch High School), Deanna Medek (Delta College) and Yadira Vivero (Weber Institute of Technology).
The utility-box art is not the only new color downtown. A group of artists recently created a large mural on Weber Avenue outside the construction site for the new San Joaquin County courthouse.
Location, ST | website.com


text:
We enjoy serving this tasty chicken to company as well as family—it's really fast and easy to fix.
—Carolin Cattoi-Demkiw, Lethbridge, Alberta
Bruschetta Chicken Recipe»
In my search for the perfect mocha cheesecake, I ended up combining a few of my favorite recipes to create this delicious version.
—Sue Gronholz, Beaver Dam, Wisconsin
Layered Mocha Cheesecake Recipe»
My family first tasted this rich, classic lasagna at a friend's home on Christmas Eve. We were so impressed that it became our own holiday tradition as well.—Lorri Foockle, Granville, Illinois
Traditional Lasagna Recipe»
My entire family loves this cheese dip. I often get requests to bring it to gatherings with friends. Chopped scallions make a pretty garnish.—Julie Koch, Delaware, Ohio
Beer Cheese in a Bread Bowl Recipe»
View all Top 10 recipe collections >
Please enter a valid email
Please Select Username to appear on public areas of the site like community and recipe comments.


text:
Definition of double glazing in English:
double glazing
noun[mass noun] chiefly British
Windows which have two layers of glass with a space between them, designed to reduce loss of heat and exclude noise: we have been able to put in double glazing and central heating
More example sentences
- Argon is a poorer conductor of heat than air, and so using it to maintain the pressure between the panes results in less heat loss than air-filled double glazing.
- In warm climates, where summertime heat gain is the main concern, look for windows with double glazing and spectrally selective coatings that reduce heat gain.
- The kitchens are all fully fitted, there are also; luxurious sofas, telephone, central heating, double glazing, French windows, large screen TV and video.
- the company would be asked to double-glaze the windows of some of the village housesMore example sentences
- For maximum energy efficiency, windows are double-glazed and argon gas-filled.
- Most of the windows were double-glazed; the patio doors, however, were not.
- Or you could all turn down your air conditioning and double-glaze your windows at home to saw the winter heating bills.
For editors and proofreaders
Line breaks: double glaz¦ing
Definition of double glazing in:
What do you find interesting about this word or phrase?
Comments that don't adhere to our Community Guidelines may be moderated or removed.
= trending


text:
Encounters With Diversity, on Campuses and in Coursework, Bolster Critical-Thinking Skills
Las Vegas
Worries about the quality of undergraduate education tend to be magnified by concerns about the increasing diversity of students entering college.
Many colleges are already struggling to adequately teach students and to document their learning to the...
This content is available exclusively to Chronicle subscribers
Already a subscriber?
Log in now
Not a subscriber yet?
Subscribe now for instant access to this article and thousands of others, data tables, and interactive charts — all available exclusively for Chronicle subscribers. Plus your subscription includes weekly print or digital delivery of The Chronicle and The Review and the Chronicle iPad® Edition.Subscribe Today


text:
Mary Rupnow R.E. Appraisals LLC emerged after a 13 year affiliation with Egan Appraisal Services in Watertown, Wisconsin. I feel fortunate to continue to provide high quality appraisals with fast friendly service.
Service Area:
Jefferson County: Watertown, Ixonia, Sullivan, Johnson Creek, Waterloo
Dodge County: Ashippun, Hustisford, Beaver Dam, Horicon
Waukesha County: Oconomowoc, Dousman, Merton
Washington County: Hartford, Erin, West Bend
Dane County: Sun Prairie, Deerfield
Types of Appraisals:
Rural Residential
Mini farm
Vacant Land
New Construction
Small Income
Residential Income
Divorce Appraisal
Estate Settlement
Types of Appraisals:
Mary Rupnow RE Appraisals LLC is approved to do business with most primary lenders throughout SE Wisconsin. Providing fully insured Certified Residential Appraisals, with the experience you can trust. Our commitment to service and to the environment has been advanced to include paperless appraisals, online ordering and compliance with HVCC by joining Mercury Network.


text:
Quarterback Tate Forcier has withdrawn from San Jose State and is no longer a part of the football program.
"He's not going to continue," Forcier's father, Michael, said Monday. "There's too much pressure, too much stress."
The former Michigan starter never played a down for the Spartans after enrolling in school, to much fanfare, last summer.
Forcier sat out the 2011 season and was expected to start next season.
His tenuous academic standing played a role in the decision to leave school, according to a source close to the situation. But Michael Forcier said personal and financial issues also were factors.
Forcier was not on scholarship this year; his family was paying tuition.
"We have a family business," said Michael Forcier, who runs a bus and limousine service. "It hasn't been a good year, like for a lot of people. Tate's helping us out right now, in fact."
Forcier informed SJSU's coaches of his decision to leave school "a while ago," Michael Forcier said.
He added: "It wasn't a clean thing, like he didn't like school. He loves football, and he loves San Jose State. He has a lot going on in his life and wants to take time and find it."
Without Forcier, SJSU's quarterback will come from a group of unproven candidates, including Dasmen Stewart, Blake Jurich, Joe Gray and recruit David Fales, who has transferred from Monterey Peninsula College.
Fales originally signed with Nevada.
Stewart is the most experienced of the quartet, having played in four games last season. He completed 40.4 percent of his passes, with no touchdowns and one interception.
SJSU coach Mike MacIntyre could not be reached for comment.
Located in Orlando, UCF is joining the Big East in all sports next year. The school is expected to announce its decision Tuesday.
Bowen has orchestrated SJSU's financial and competitive turnaround since taking over Spartans athletics in 2004.
Before taking over at SJSU, he worked for Cal, Saint Mary's and the 49ers.
For more on college sports, see Jon Wilner's College Hotline at blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports. Contact him at email@example.com or 408-920-5716.


text:
AIA IPO Doing Well in the Gray Market
Everyone is all giddy that AIG's AIA initial public offering is doing well in the so-called Gray Market, trading up about 10-11% from its IPO price.
But should they be? The AIA IPO is set to raise about $20 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal. So, if the shares are already up 10% before trading starts officially on Friday in Hong Kong, that's $2 billion left on the table. I suspect a good many American taxpayers, already a bit miffed by the various bailouts, might have preferred that $2 billion come to them.
It is an enduring mystery. Companies go public and sell their shares for X. "Good" offerings shoot higher, usually because they were priced too low, something that ought to irk the issuing company. Even Google tried to fight this when it went public in 2040, but even its shares shot higher more than 20% on the first trading day.
It shows the power and persuasion of investment banks. AIG is probably thrilled.


text:
Product Description
Adjustable Lower Clutch Rod for 1971-1973 Mustangs.This clutch rod is an exact reproduction of the original lower clutch rod on 71-73 Mustangs. It attaches from the equalizer bar to the clutch release lever. Includes adjusting nuts.
Similar Mustang PartsMore Equalizer Bars
Installation Instructions
Product ReviewsWrite a review
Lower Clutch Rod Adjustable 1971-1973 is rated out of 5 by 1.
Rated 5 out of 5 by Stlcard12 from Just what I needed! Just what I needed. Upon reassembly of my 1973 Mustang, I could not find the rod. You had the exact replacement which let me breathe a sigh of relief. I hate going to junkyards.
Date published: 2015-04-01
Product Questions
You Might Also Like
CJ's Low Price:$44.99
CJ's Low Price:$10.99
CJ's Low Price:$5.99


text:
User Friendly 2010, whose theme is "Embracing Asian Culture", is UPA China's seventh annual UX conference. It will take place in Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, from Nov 12th - 14th, 2010. Over the past decade, UX has been gradually gaining recognition throughout Asia. Although it is still a relatively new term in the region, Asian businesses are now beginning to see the importance of good usability, and the UX market is steadily maturing.
I am considering the fast track HFI usability courses - has anyone taken those? I found a thread from 2007 on the topic but was wondering if anyone had more recent experience. Thanks in advance.
Here's the info on the training: http://www.humanfactors.com/training/schedule.asp
In a recent convo on Twitter, Janna DeVylder, Dave Malouf, Steve Baty and I were discoursing about the difficulties of traversing the Research > Design chasm. Some really great thoughts ensued. So, I thought I'd keep the convo going here.
It's a topic I'm keely interested in. Having helped present From Design to Research at Agile '09, and having worked on this for many years, I still realize I have lots to learn.
Hi all,
I've been doing remote work as a usability / IA professional consultant on and off for about four years now. I have a home office here in Dallas, and have clients all over North America. At the moment, business is pretty good.
IxDA Buenos Aires convoca a empresas, organizaciones y profesionales independientes de los campos de diseño, desarrollo y experiencia de usuario a participar de la primera edición de los premios UADI.
Los UADI premian los trabajos realizados en las disciplinas de usabilidad, arquitectura de información, diseño de interacción e innovación en experiencia de usuario en Argentina.
La inscripción comienza el 16 de septiembre de 2010 y se extiende hasta el 14 de Octubre.
I have been posed with a
different challenge –
Hello beautiful community,
For a brief break during the workday, I once posted some humor and satire about the field that was well received. Then the site ended and for awhile the humorous stuff was unavailable. I apologize for this outage. In response to ongoing requests by visitors, the humor has been restored and moved to http://www.filippsapienza.com/blog1/2010/02/02/humorous-writing/
Serious about getting as much feedback as possible, Justinmind will launch several testing contests, both on MAC OS X and Windows, giving away free licenses of Prototyper as prizes.
This private beta will kick start starts tomorrow, on September 1st. Watch the trailer and register online to participate.
More info:
Hi all! We've just done a new blog post in our "Design, Development, Usability" blog and would really like your opinion and comments.
The post discuss about affordance of buttons and question the relationship between visual design and usability.


text:
Previous reports: September 14 21 28, October 5 12 19 26.
Other Hotlines: Minnesota Duluth/North Shore | Detroit Lakes
-RBA *Minnesota *Minnesota Statewide *November 2, 2006 *MNST0611.02-Birds mentioned
Hotline: Minnesota Statewide
Date: November 2, 2006
Sponsor: Minnesota Ornithologists' Union (MOU) http://moumn.org
Reports: (763) 780-8890
Compiler: Anthony Hertzel (email@example.com)
This is the Minnesota Birding Report for Thursday November 2nd 2006.
As many as eight thousand TUNDRA SWANS have been reported from along the Mississippi River in Houston County. One good location from which to view the swans is from the pull-off at mile marker 11 of state highway 26 south of the town of Brownsville. Many of the birds are close enough to shore that birders need not get out of their cars. Indeed, doing so would probably unnecessarily disturb the swans.
A LITTLE GULL was reported at the Garrison harbor in Crow Wing County on the 29th, and another continues to be seen at the Ironton sewage lagoons in the same county.
A LESSER BLACK-BACKED GULL has been at the Purgatory Creek wetlands off Prairie Center Drive in Eden Prairie, Hennepin County for about a week.
Interesting was the October 29th report of a female BLACK-BACKED WOODPECKER along the trail that leads south from the visitor's center at Afton State Park in Washington County. Take the trail south for about a third of a mile go east into the woods. Look for the stand of red pines.
A trip up the north shore of Lake Superior on October 28th produced several interesting reports. A third-winter Lesser Black-backed Gull was at Canal Park in Duluth. Seven AMERICAN THREE-TOED WOODPECKERS were counted at the following places: One on Alseth Road at Stoney Point, three at Lighthouse Point in Two Harbors, two at Good Harbor Bay just south of Grand Marais, one in the Grand Marais campground, one along state highway 61 at mile marker 121, and one at Paradise Beach about fourteen miles up the shore from Grand Marais. Twenty-eight Black-backed Woodpeckers were also seen at these and other locations. Seven TOWNSEND'S SOLITAIRES were reported at the following locations: one at Alseth Road, two on the west side of Stoney Point, one at 4th Avenue and 2nd Street in Two Harbors, one at Good Harbor Bay, two along the Croftville Road just northeast of Grand Marais, and three at the small town of Colville.
Another Townsend's Solitaire was found on the 29th near the Bluestem Scientific and Natural Area southeast of the town of Glyndon in Clay County. The bird was at a farm on 17th Avenue about half a mile west of county road 23.
GRAY JAYS have been moving into the Upper Midwest in higher than usual numbers. In Minnesota, reports have come in from as far west as Kittson County and as far south as Otter Tail County -- two birds were seen in Fergus Falls on the 23rd. I also have reports of PINE GROSBEAK, HOARY REDPOLL, RED CROSSBILL, and WHITE-WINGED CROSSBILL.
The next scheduled update of this tape is Thursday, November 9th 2006.
Send your rare and unusual Minnesota sightings to our internet list sevice:
Learn more about MOU-net.


text:
Do we keep the Scorpions up late at night?
The Arizona Scorpions may have clobbered us this week, but we're certainly on their minds. In fact, "Chicago" is one of the biggest items on the Scorpion blog tag cloud. Do they write about us because despite their good fortune in beating us three times this year and last, they secretly fear we're a smoldering fire ready to ignite and that their string against us is about to end?
Yes, that must be it.
Anyway, their bloggers have done an interesting job of analyzing the games from this week's match, so have a look, here and here.


text:
Please log in or register to manage your account
Model: F100 Item: GNPF100
Squat paper portion cup is designed for durability with tightly rolled rim and box pleats. The tightly wound rim plus recessed base help prevent tipping or spilling on countertops. Cup Type: Portion; Capacity (Volume): 1 oz; Material(s): Paper; Color(s): White.
Printerbazaar is a one-stop destination for all your office supplies. From highly durable branded printers to a plethora of accessories, you can get your suitable product at a competitive cost.
At Printerbazaar, we are committed to make your shopping experience hassle-free by conveying the best information. We understand that office related purchasing decisions are vital and thus the right comparisons are necessary before buying.
Genpak® Clear Hinged Deli Container, 16oz, 5 3/8 x 4 1/2 x 2 5/8, 100/Bag, 2 Bags/Carton
$41.32$2562 / each
Genpak® Foam School Trays, 5-Comp, 10 2/5 x 8 2/5 x 1 1/4, White, 500/Carton
$47.44$3036 / each


text:
Chris Thile's Bach on Mandolin
Chris Thile talks with host Brian McCreath about playing Bach's music on the mandolin and his recording of solo violin sonatas and partitas.
Hear the extended interview
On the program:
Two-Part Inventions Nos. 8 in F, BWV 779, 11 in G minor, BWV 782, & 10 in G, BWV 781 - Till Fellner, piano
Cantata BWV 49 Ich geh' und suche mit Verlangen (translation) - Caroline Weynants, soprano; Lieven Termont, bass; Il Gardelino, Marcel Ponseele, director
Partita No. 1 in B minor, BWV 1002: VIII. Double - Chris Thile, mandolin
Sonata No. 1 in G minor, BWV 1001 - Chris Thile, mandolin
(photo of Chris Thile courtesy of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation)


text:
Familia Zuccardi Q Malbec 2012
Zuccardi Q Malbec is the blend of three unique vineyard sites. It shows a red violet color, with bluish hues. Intense red and black fruits aromas. Spicy, violet and chocolate nuances. Silky entry with great structure, soft and mature tannins. Intense fruity flavors and a persistent finish.
Altos de la Hormigas Malbec 2013
The destemmed and softly pressed grapes are vinified in stainless vats at 30ş Celsius. During the 15 days fermentation-maceration process the must is pumped and punched down for optimal extraction. The 50% of the wine stays in first use American oak and a 10% in second use French oak. The wine...
Santa Julia + represents their strong commitment to Sustainability, the people and the land. This wine has good complexity in the nose with typical Malbec aromas of ripe fruits such as figs, plums and blackberries. Notes of vanilla, tobacco, coffee and chocolate. This Malbec is a full-bodied red wine with sweet...
Santa Julia Malbec Organica 2014
100% organically grown Malbec from Santa Rosa and Maipu vineyards in Mendoza. It has a complex nose with varietal notes of ripe fruits, figs, prunes, jam and raisins. The body is good, with sweet tannins. The wine is well balanced by acidity and has a lingering and complex finish.


text:
BARBOURVILLE Ky. (WYMT) - The Knox Central Panthers are preparing for a date with the South Laurel Cardinals at the Pioneer Bowl on Friday night.
Head coach Scott Russell says one thing that sticks out about the Cardinals is their firepower on offense.
"Well, the biggest thing about South Laurel is how explosive they are on offense", said Russell. They've got a great set of receivers, a very good quarterback that's been starting there for a couple of years. They've got speed all over the place, they're big up front. You know, we're going to have to go out there and try to slow them down."
Kickoff between the Knox Central Panthers and the South Laurel Cardinals is scheduled for 6pm at Lynn Camp.


text:
LEXINGTON, Ky. -- After improving to a nation-leading 16-0 with five wins last week, the Kentucky baseball team has climbed to No. 16 in the Collegiate Baseball top-30 poll and has made its season debut in the USA Today/ESPN coaches poll, checking in No. 20, it was announced on Monday morning.
Kentucky (16-0) moved from No. 23 in the Collegiate Baseball poll last Monday to No. 16 after the 5-0 week. The Wildcats made their season debut in the USA Today/ESPN coaches top-25 on Monday, with the No. 20 ranking.
The Wildcats are off to the third-best start in the over 100-year history of the program, leading the NCAA in wins, with its 16-game winning streak ranking as tops in the nation. UK is the only undefeated team remaining in college baseball among teams that have played at least four games.
UK start has been paced by a balanced approach, with its dynamic offense ranking among the league leader in nearly every category. The Wildcats lead the Southeastern Conference in average (.349), on-base percentage (.452), runs (147), hits (191), RBI (136), total bases (283) and hit batters (33). UK's offense also ranks second in the league in slugging (.516), second in doubles (38), third in homers (16), second in walks (80) and fifth in stolen bases.
Kentucky returns to action with its final pre-SEC midweek games, hosting Wright State at 4 p.m. ET on Tuesday at Cliff Hagan Stadium and Murray State on Wednesday at 4 p.m. ET. The Wildcats will then open SEC play with the two-time defending NCAA Champions, No. 2 South Carolina with a three-game set at Cliff Hagan Stadium.
Collegiate Baseball Top-30
1. Florida
2. South Carolina
3. Stanford
4. North Carolina
5. Arkansas
6. Florida St.
7. Rice
8. Cal. St. Fullerton
9. Texas A&M
11. Miami, Fla.
12. Oregon
13. Arizona
14. Stetson
15. Ole Miss
16. Kentucky
18. Arizona St.
19. N.C. State
20. Georgia Tech
21. Oklahoma
22. Louisville
23. Georgia
24. Wake Forest
25. California
26. Purdue
27. Texas Tech.
28. Oregon St.
29. Central Florida
30. Texas St.


text:
The convenience of home near downtown Seattle!
From $93 / night
|Per night:
|$165 - $250
|Per week:
|$1,050 - $1,550
|Pets allowed:
Bedrooms: 2
Bathrooms: 1
Sleeps: 4
Type: Home
Pets allowed: No
Internet: Yes
Painted in designer colors this attached daylight suite features private entry from a cozy deck overlooking the Cascade mountains. It's spacious and tastefully appointed and wonderful for business, pleasure, or both.
Your comfort is our mission. We offer dining and living under nine foot ceilings and a fully equipped kitchen with warm cork flooring. We use earth friendly products and offer a variety of natural & organic foods to enjoy during your stay. The bedrooms have large closets with plenty of storage space, and two elegant queen suites with Simmons Beautyrest mattresses. These cozy beds are made with high thread count allergy-free bedding.
Our location makes it easy to take in the many events & activities Seattle has to offer!
Within easy walking distance you'll find the thriving Alaska Junction with restaurants, boutique shopping, art galleries, live theater, a post office, groceries, and a weekly farmers market.
For fun & leisurely activities Alki beach is just three miles from here. Only six miles to downtown. Commute by car or public transportation to quickly get to all popular city sights.
Safeco Field, CenturyLink Field, and Key Arena
Seattle Center - EMP & Pacific Science center
Pike Place Market & the Aquarium
Seattle Art Museum
University district
the Eastside
SeaTac International Airport
Also near frequent Ferries to Vashon Island & the Olympic Peninsula
All amenities are nearby.
Some extras
· Beautiful views
· Central commuter location
· Excellent local parks and shopping
· Leaf friendly
· Great neighborhood
We're close to the beach & downtown with an easy commute by car or public transportation.
Seattle's got sporting events, trade shows, music, theater, art, science, and a famous downtown market. You'll find lots of great dining and shopping, too! And beyond the city is the entire Puget Sound & Olympic Peninsula to explore.
About the owner
Owner Profile
School:Feldenkrais Training, Trauma Training, Media Arts, and Computer Systems
Work:Vacation Host, Healing Facilitator
About:The things that matter most to me are family, friends, and a shared sense of community. I love to travel, meet new people, and share stories of past adventures. I've explored new places and made many friends in Canada, the U.S., Mexico, China, South Korea, England, Switzerland, Denmark, the...
- View full profile
Availability Calendar
|Jul 01 2016
|Sep 05 2016
|3 Nights
|Sep 06 2016
|Sep 30 2016
|3 Nights
|Oct 01 2016
|May 31 2017
|3 Months
|Apr 01 2017
|Apr 30 2017
|3 Nights
|May 01 2017
|May 31 2017
|3 Nights
|May 01 2017
|May 31 2017
|3 Nights
|Jun 01 2017
|Jun 30 2017
|3 Nights
|Jun 01 2017
|Jun 30 2017
|3 Nights
|Jul 01 2017
|Sep 05 2017
|3 Nights
|Sep 06 2017
|Sep 30 2017
|3 Nights
|Oct 01 2017
|Nov 22 2017
|3 Nights
|Nov 23 2017
|Nov 30 2017
|3 Nights
|Dec 01 2017
|Dec 22 2017
|3 Nights
|Dec 23 2017
|Jan 01 2018
|3 Nights
|Jan 02 2018
|Mar 31 2018
|3 Nights
|Apr 01 2018
|Apr 30 2018
|3 Nights
|May 01 2018
|May 31 2018
|3 Nights
|Jun 01 2018
|Jun 30 2018
|3 Nights
|View all periods
|Check In: 3 p.m. Check Out: 11 a.m.
|Lodging tax: 9.5%
|Deposits: * $350 Damage deposit required with your reservation. * Cancellation Policy: The damage deposit is non-refundable if the reservation is canceled within two weeks of the check-in date. A $50 processing fee will be withheld for all other cancellations. It's understood that you will be responsible for any damages that may arise during your stay and that the damage deposit may constitute all or part of such damages.
|Payment Options: Mastercard, Visa
|Other Fees: $130 cleaning fee * 2 night rental available at $300/nt ** Unless confirmed with a reservation these rates are subject to change at the discretion of the owners.
- 2 Queen Beds
- Beach Chairs
- Deck
- Heating
- Linens Provided
- Beach Towels
- Full Kitchen
- High Speed Internet
- View (Mountains)
- Blender
- Hair Dryer
- Radio
- TV (Cable/Satellite)
- CD Player
- Iron
- Refrigerator (Mini)
- Telephone
- Coffee Maker
- Microwave
- Stereo
- Toaster
- DVD Player
- Oven
- Stove
- Washer/Dryer
- Dishwasher
- Bowling
(<1 mile)
- Bicycling
(3 miles)
- Pool
(3 miles)
- Whale Watching
(6 miles)
- Golf
(<1 mile)
- Boating
(3 miles)
- Sailing
(3 miles)
- Amusement Park
(7 miles)
- Grocery Store
(<1 mile)
- Canoeing
(3 miles)
- Scuba Diving
(3 miles)
- Lake
(7 miles)
- Gym/Fitness Center
(<1 mile)
- Fishing
(3 miles)
- Snorkeling
(3 miles)
- Theme Park
(7 miles)
- Live Entertainment
(<1 mile)
- Jet Skiing
(3 miles)
- Water Skiing
(3 miles)
- Casino
(10 miles)
- Restaurant
(<1 mile)
- Kayaking
(3 miles)
- Windsurfing
(3 miles)
- Hiking
(10 miles)
- Shopping Area
(<1 mile)
- Ocean
(3 miles)
- Aquarium
(6 miles)
- Zoo
(10 miles)
- Movie Theater
(1 mile)
- Park
(3 miles)
- Parasailing
(6 miles)
- Winery
(24 miles)
- Beach
(3 miles)
Reviews (13)
Reviews for this vacation home rental in Seattle, Washington
Everything you could want
Edie Smith
Corpus Christi, Texas
Everything you could want
August 5, 2015
I absolutely loved this apartment rental!! It was spacious and well appointed. It was stocked with all the little things you don't want to have to spend vacation money on. The location was very convenient and as an introvert I loved having private parking and private entrance. It was a blessed retreat from the hustle and bustle of vacation life.
Awesome, awesome and then some!
Ellen Johnston
Honolulu, Hawaii
Awesome, awesome and then some!
July 14, 2015
I know writing this review will mean I will probably have trouble rebooking when I want to come back but in all honesty if you are looking for an extremely comfortable place away from home don't miss Marie and Brian's hideaway. The beds are s-o-o-o comfortable, the kitchen has everything you could want to prepare a full meal, and it is so clean and welcoming and...to sit out on the porch in the morning with a cup of coffee taking in the view which included the hummingbirds taking their fill from the sweet-smelling star jasmine is just too much. Not to mention the evening view from that porch!! Marie and Brian are hosts to the max, leaving wonderful baked bread and other treats to make your stay even more comfortable and enjoyable. My only regret is now that the word is out I will have to plan our West Seattle visits (we have family very close by) way in advance because we enjoyed our stay here so much we won't be happy staying any where else.
shirley davis
Memphis, TN USA
August 25, 2014
Words can't describe the hospitality, professionalism, customer relationships, etc.... I could go on and on. To walk out on the deck and see the beautiful flowers, plants, and the breath taking humming birds was priceless and speechless. Thank you Marie and Brian. I will definitely be back!!!!! Ciao.
Owner's reply:
Thank you Shirley! We would love to have you and your friends stay with us any time. It was a pleasure to meet you and to host your stay. It's always a treat to hear hardy laughter and we heard it again and again during your time with us. We're so glad you enjoyed your trip to Seattle! We're looking forward to another visit!
Seattle holiday
Bill Becker
Olympic Peninsula
Seattle holiday
December 2, 2013
The property was clean, comfortable, convenient and reasonable. We would definitely recommend it.
Don't tell anyone!
Annette Tromly
Toronto, Canada
Don't tell anyone!
October 12, 2013
Reviewing this apartment is difficult for us. Why? Because it was so good in every way that we're afraid of attracting other people to it--and we hope to go back many times. The apartment is spacious, with two bedrooms (very comfortable beds and luxurious bedding) and unusually large closets. It is also beautifully decorated and well-equipped. (We were able to have brunches for our extended family; everything we needed was there.) There is a front deck facing the mountains, a private front yard, and space to park a car. The owners are lovely people. When we arrived (we were staying a month), they had stocked some shelves with food, so we didn't have to go out right away to shop. Throughout our stay, they did everything they could to make us comfortable and accommodate our needs. For us, the location was perfect: very close to family. The apartment is in walking distance to the West Seattle Junction--and in easy driving distance to the beautiful parks and beaches that are located in West Seattle. Also, there is easy bus service to downtown Seattle. In short, this is a splendid place--but please don't go there when we want to!
Owner's reply:
Fred and Annette are a couple who take life on with a blast of exuberance. I love their happy energy and obvious excitement at spending time with their grandchildren and being close to family. It always gives us a little thrill to see our guests entertaining in our suite. Fred and Annette really made it their home, and we truly enjoyed being neighbors during their stay.
Wonderful stay in West Seattle!
Sandra Hulleman
Edmonton, AB, Canada
Wonderful stay in West Seattle!
September 7, 2013
My husband and I, and another couple stayed Aug 30 - Sept 3. This place is everything that the listing says it is. Marie was around if we had questions but otherwise left us to ourselves. The only thing this rental does not have is a dishwasher but hey a little soap and water won't hurt. It was great!!!
Owner's reply:
It was very nice to meet Sandra & her traveling party, and to hear how they enjoyed our city and our cozy suite! It's also lovely that they took time to start the day comfortably, with coffee on the deck. We always appreciated the excellent care our guests take of our place, and are mindful that a dishwasher would be helpful. We just haven't found a place where it would fit, or one would definitely be included. Gratefully, Marie & Brian.
The Best at The West Seattle Junction!
Kathleen Felli
Vail, Colorado
The Best at The West Seattle Junction!
March 6, 2013
I spent the month of February on business at this property (without a car no less!) and Marie & Brian could not have been better hosts...not to mention the fantastic location/accessibility to grocery, public transportation, restaurants etc.! A true oasis of tranquility and a great view, even in winter! Thank you!!!
Gloria Purcell
Livermore, CA
October 1, 2012
We were very much impressed with the apartment. It was very nice and our beds were very very confortable!! Close to everything & the views were awesome!!
Wonderful vacation rental!
Greg Hula
Idaho Falls, ID
Wonderful vacation rental!
August 3, 2012
The rental was everything the photos showed it to be! Marie had a wonderful bottle of wine waiting for us, as well as bread, fresh fruit and other goodies to make us feel welcome. A very comfortable suite for my husband and teenage daughters, very close to downtown Seattle - and Marie was so easy to work with! We hope to be back again! Thanks Marie!
Owner's reply:
Seattle's a wonderful place to come to and we're glad to be located where city events are so accessible. It's fun to see our guests, like the Hula's, having fun & taking in the many activities around town. And we're happy to offer a comfortable, welcoming home for our happy travelers at the end of an event packed day. We look forward to return visits where all our returning guests get 10% off our regular price.
Awesome honeymoon in Seatttle
Austin Davis
Tampa, FL USA
Awesome honeymoon in Seatttle
July 4, 2012
Marie was a more than fantastic host. My wife and I stayed here for our honeymoon, and had a wonderful time. We missed out connecting flight out of Atlanta on the way, as a result we arrived very late in the evening on our first day. Marie was very accomodating about that fact. When we arrived we found a bottle of wine and delicious raisin bread to greet us- we snacked on that raisin bread all week. The condo is absolutely beautiful and nice and cozy. It is also very conveniently located to Seattle, only a 25 minute drive in the worst traffic. Seattle was an awesome city. After our trip my wife and I are considering moving to Seattle in about five years after we are done with graduate studies. The weather in Seattle was absolutely delightful, I wore a jacket the entire time-as a native Floridian this was both novel and a welcome treat. My wife and I are both urban dwellers and nature enthusiasts, and Seattle was perfect place for us. Seattle is an ideal city to me,all the excitement of a big city without being overwhelming. The people from the area also very nice. It was also ideally located to several nature enthusiast location-we went to a few state parks and Mt. Ranier. The view of the mountians from the harbour was beautiful. I am very glad that we chose both Seattle and Marie's condo for our honeymoon. It was a very memorable experience. I would definitely consider returning to Seattle and Marie's condo,and could not recomend it enough. If your considering Seattle, this is an ideal location for your trip.
Owner's reply:
...It was a pleasure hosting Austin & Stephanie's honeymoon accommodations while they tripped around Seattle. And it was special for us to have newly weds here during the time Brian & I celebrate our own wedding anniversary.
They certainly took full advantage of the sights in and around town. Again and again people come here and fall in love with Seattle. We feel privileged to be in a position to accommodate that experience for others, and to live in this wonderful area.
Austin & Stephanie, please let us know when you're heading our way again. We'd love to have you back as guests – or neighbors!
A Welcome Retreat
Terry Headline
Minneapolis, MN
A Welcome Retreat
March 23, 2012
We really enjoyed our stay in Seattle and at this vacation rental. I've been talking it up to all my friends and co-workers as 'the best way to travel!". The accommodations were great and the personal touches even better (we especially appreciated the fresh flowers along with bread/cheese waiting for us on the dining table).
Owner's reply:
Thanks, Terry, for sharing your appreciation of what we offer at our rental suite. We are also avid B&B travelers. It's definitely our favorite way to get acquainted with an unfamiliar place & the people who live there. I feel much more a part of the culture of a place when residing within the community. We also enjoyed meeting you & Becca, and appreciate the care you took of our suite during your stay.
The hostess with the mostest...feel special!
Judi Froning
North San Diego County, CA
The hostess with the mostest...feel special!
July 20, 2011
Wow! Marie made our stay feel so special! There were four of us and we arrived in the evening to find fresh flowers, coffee, breakfast, and many other staples already waiting for us! The 2 bedroom (2 queen beds, comfy), 1 bath suite, is absolutely spotless...plenty of towels, gorgeous view from back deck. Marie brought us fresh berries in the morning and was so helpful with ideas, places, and just plain friendship. We felt like family. Our previous stays at bed and breakfast places were never this special. Marie and Brian are incredible hosts!
above and beyond
Vancouer BC
above and beyond
September 13, 2010
Our stay at West Seattle Vacation Junction was an entirely wonderful experience. The host(s) went above and beyond in ever aspect. We were welcomed with a big smile, food in the fridge and a bottle of wine. The suite is beautiful, comfortable and unwinding after a long week was easy on the deck. Its a quick drive to Seattle's Centre and great shops, coffee spots and restaurants are within walking distance. We will definitely be back.
Write a review!
Interested in Renting this Property?
Contact Owner
Owner Profile
(206) 852-4469
School:Feldenkrais Training, Trauma Training, Media Arts, and Computer Systems
Work:Vacation Host, Healing Facilitator
About:The things that matter most to me are family, friends, and a shared sense of community. I love to travel, meet new people, and share stories of past adventures. I've explored new places and made many friends in Canada, the U.S., Mexico, China, South Korea, England, Switzerland, Denmark, the...
- View full profile
15 Reviews
13 Reviews
10 Reviews
4 Reviews
16 Reviews
5 Reviews
1 Reviews
9 Reviews


text:
The Cay
by Theodore Taylor
Analysis: Trivia
Brain Snacks: Tasty Tidbits of Knowledge
Author Theodore Taylor was a jack of all trades: he worked as a journalist, served in World War II, and produced films in Hollywood before dedicating himself to writing novels for both children and adults (source).
Taylor began writing at age 13, covering sports for the Sunday edition of the Portsmouth Star (source).
After World War II, Taylor was involved in the testing of two atomic bombs at Bikini Atoll. The experience inspired his book The Bomb (1995) (source).
Christopher Columbus landed on the Caribbean island of Curaçao in 1499. The Dutch invaded and conquered the island in 1634 (source).


text:
Greater Tuna: The Long-Running Small-Town Comedy Satire
* Additional fees apply. No coupon or promo codes necessary to enjoy the displayed discount price.
The last date listed for Greater Tuna was Thursday August 25, 2011 / 8:00pm.
Most Popular Theater Event Nearby
Beautiful - The Carole King Musical: Hit Broadway Bio
- Full Price:
- $100.00
- Our Price:
- $55.00 - $70.00
Long before Carole King became a chart-topping music legend, she was Carol Klein, a girl from… More
Venue Details
Reviews & Ratings
Featured review from HllywdRed Velvet
view more less of this review
Both of these men were remarkable in their ability to play multiple roles. I especially enjoyed the actor who played all of the female parts. He was a hoot. As far as the story line, it seemed a bit disjointed and some of the lines and dialogue could have been better. The writing/script did not seem top notch. Also, it was difficult at times to imagine things as there was very minimal use of real props. You have to be in the mindset to really pay attention to the dialogue and to create your own visuals. This can be a fun or daunting task depending on the mood you are in. As always, I love this intimate small theater and the staff is consistently wonderful.
star this review starred report as inappropriate
Loads of fun. Small theatre, big laughs. What else can I say?
star this review starred report as inappropriate
Amazing job of two actors creating more than a dozen characters, and doing it superbly. Very funny lines and some good laughs, plus some thought provoking scenes. Overall a very nice production.
star this review starred report as inappropriate
Very entertaining. 2 actors carried the entire play!
Dress in layers because the air conditioning can be problematic.
_Greater Tuna _
Directed by Richard Robert Bunker
Featuring Titus France and George Mauro
Welcome to the "third smallest town in Texas", where the Lions Club is viewed as suspiciously liberal and Roots is pulled from the library because "it only shows one side of the slavery issue." Yet despite Tuna's quirky small-town politics, we see ourselves in its inhabitants' all-too-human struggles, triumphs and foibles. Greater Tuna was performed at the White House for President George H.W. Bush (Sr.) and earned the SF Bay Area Critics Award and LA Dramalogue Award for playwright Jaston Williams. Rated PG-13 for sharp satire.