| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
I'm loving this Global Warming...
Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10,
occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 22, 4:31 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Same here. it's been very pleasant. light shower this morning, light breeze this afternoon. partly cloudy, and tonight 68 degrees. tomorrow? THE LAKE! |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... I got yer global warming right here...111 today and tomorrow. Oo-rah! |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) Don't water your lawn. It will go dormant in the summer and come back nice and prettily green in the fall and then dormant for the winter and then prettily green again in the spring. Watering a lawn is a waste of money, watering a golf course is an investment. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"BAR" wrote in message . .. John H. wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) Don't water your lawn. It will go dormant in the summer and come back nice and prettily green in the fall and then dormant for the winter and then prettily green again in the spring. Watering a lawn is a waste of money, watering a golf course is an investment. You must not live in Florida and have a St. Augustine lawn. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"BAR" wrote in message . .. John H. wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) Don't water your lawn. It will go dormant in the summer and come back nice and prettily green in the fall and then dormant for the winter and then prettily green again in the spring. Watering a lawn is a waste of money, watering a golf course is an investment. I would rather walk around on a plush green lawn vs. a yellow dried out one. Watering via our sprinkler system does not add much to our water/sewer bill and our area is not starved for fresh water, We all have to decide how to spend our money and what is important to us. Cheers. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... The wind machine out here is working overtime. Salmon in the ocean are safe, as it is too nasty of seas to go out. Off to the lake with a couple of buddies tomorrow. We were supposed to be in a salmon tourney, that was postponed. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 22, 10:44 pm, "CalifBill" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in messagenews:aofo73tb936k4c11co60lddavfqr3t6k1e@4ax .com... Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... The wind machine out here is working overtime. Salmon in the ocean are safe, as it is too nasty of seas to go out. Off to the lake with a couple of buddies tomorrow. We were supposed to be in a salmon tourney, that was postponed. Right now, it's 75 with a light east breez probably 5 mph. with an expected light shower tonight with a low of 68. tomorrow, high of 87 and low humidity. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:27:57 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Yeah.... right.... Its 77F right now and it is almost 9PM. 90F and above for the last 2 weeks. Cooling off to 84F tomorrow and then back to 90+F. Water temperatures in the mid 70's...... Well Gene, that's what the weather is supposed to be like in North Carolina. Up here in New England, this is what the weather is supposed to be like. WX on my handy dandy weather station? Instrument: Temp: 50.2 °F / 10 °C Humidity: 90% Dew Point: 47 °F / 8 °C Wind: 0.0 mph / 0 km/h Wind Gust: 0.0 mph / 0 km/h Pressu 29.84 in / 1010.4 hPa (Rising) Observed: Sky: Clear Visibility: 10.0 miles / 16.1 kilometers UV: 0 out of 16 Clouds: Clear Beautiful New England Weather. We're supposed to have a couple of days of heat - high 80's - next week. ~~ snerk ~~ |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:16:47 -0500, John H.
wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) You water your lawn? Good lord man, don't you know that water is a precious resource? Water your lawn - HA!! |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:52:39 -0400, BAR wrote:
John H. wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) Don't water your lawn. It will go dormant in the summer and come back nice and prettily green in the fall and then dormant for the winter and then prettily green again in the spring. Watering a lawn is a waste of money, watering a golf course is an investment. Mine stays green all year long. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 23, 5:30 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
Mine stays green all year long.- Hide quoted text - Astro-turf??? |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:03:25 -0000, Tim wrote:
On Jun 23, 5:30 am, Short Wave Sportfishing Mine stays green all year long.- Hide quoted text - Astro-turf??? If only. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:52:39 -0400, BAR wrote:
John H. wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) Don't water your lawn. It will go dormant in the summer and come back nice and prettily green in the fall and then dormant for the winter and then prettily green again in the spring. Watering a lawn is a waste of money, watering a golf course is an investment. Nope. I've got to give the neighbors a lawn to emulate. They try. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 10:29:52 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:16:47 -0500, John H. wrote: On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:31:36 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Well I'm not. Watering my lawn is costing me money. But, by not washing the pickup, I'm saving. I guess it's a wash. (Hee, hee,,,,get it?) You water your lawn? Good lord man, don't you know that water is a precious resource? Water your lawn - HA!! When the rain is scarce, the government, God love 'em, will tell us not to water. Then I'lll not water until we get more rain. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 11:03:25 -0000, Tim wrote: On Jun 23, 5:30 am, Short Wave Sportfishing Mine stays green all year long.- Hide quoted text - Astro-turf??? If only. Lots of 'home grown' manure? |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
(Sigh)....another gloomy weekend in Seattle. :( Low '60's, cloudy, showers.
JR Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
JR North wrote:
(Sigh)....another gloomy weekend in Seattle. :( Low '60's, cloudy, showers. JR Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Isn't that your predominate weather all year long? |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
HK wrote:
JR North wrote: (Sigh)....another gloomy weekend in Seattle. :( Low '60's, cloudy, showers. Isn't that your predominate weather all year long? Summer starts ~July 5th... It'll clear up a bit. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", That's what you get for shipping out with boobus Americanus. |
Eh?
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. After returning from a cruise of the Alaska waters the last thing I would think to post would be some political crap about global warming and Hillary/Gore. Half of your post was devoted to that crap. Glad to see you returned safely Chuck but get your priorities straight......post some pics of the cruise and give us more details.........but lay off the political stuff. ;-) |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:13:18 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question http://tinyurl.com/27on6c |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:13:18 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. Maybe it was the Norwegian accent that got on people's nerves. Other than the politics, what did you think of the cruise line. Would it be worth a trip to Seattle to take such a cruise on the Norwegian Line? |
Eh?
On Jun 23, 1:46?pm, "JimH" ask wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. After returning from a cruise of the Alaska waters the last thing I would think to post would be some political crap about global warming and Hillary/Gore. Half of your post was devoted to that crap. Glad to see you returned safely Chuck but get your priorities straight......post some pics of the cruise and give us more details.........but lay off the political stuff. ;-)- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - My point was that global warming (observable via retreating glaciers in AK and elsewhere) is supposed to be a *scientific* question and not a political question. Both sides (as in yours as well as mine) of the political spectrum foget that all too easily. The nay sayers often ignore all evidence to that supports observations that the climate is getting warmer, (and usually divert to remarks about Al Gore early on). Those who believe the climate is getting warmer often tend to overlook evidence that the warming may not be caused exclusively ore even partially by nasty industrialist capitalism and excessive western consumption. My short story about observing the glacier from the cruise ship was intended to illustrate how the topic becomes poliltical, not to take a political side. Ergo my concluding comment about whether one is a devout believer or devout disbeliever few who believe devoutly enough at either end of the spectrum will ever be dissuaded by anything as mundane as actual evidence. However, as my personal bias is well known I do understand when bias is read into something where it was never intended to be. I apologize to any who interpreted my observations as a political remark. Political remarks have no business in a recreational boating newsgroup. I have about 200 pictures to sort through. Views of glaciers, ice bergs, and shots of Ketchikan, Juneau, and Skagway. (Really liked Skagway a lot). Got a funny photo series taken by somebody else from shore as we were rafting down the Mendenhall river. I got stationed at the bow of the inflatable raft, and the first shot shows a raft full of people mostly smiing and laughing as we shot some class 3 rapids. I'm looking at a huge hole dead ahead, and so am slightly concerned in the first photo. In the second photo, everybody is wide-eyed and laughing....everybody except me. I don't show up in the second photo- where I am supposed to be there is this enormous wave of ice cold water that has splashed up high enough to engulf me entirely. Even through the full body rain suit and pfd that water was *darn cold*! (About 35-36 degrees). The guide said that people who fall in become hypothermic in about two minutes. I absolutely believe that......and it's based on evidence. :-) |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 23, 4:47?pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:13:18 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. Maybe it was the Norwegian accent that got on people's nerves. Other than the politics, what did you think of the cruise line. Would it be worth a trip to Seattle to take such a cruise on the Norwegian Line?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I'd recommend the cruise to anybody, especially folks from some of the more geographically remote areas of the country and for whom nearly all of the sights and experiences will be entirely new. We booked on NCL, one of the "freestyle" cruise lines. Pluses and minuses of the format: On the plus side, a wide variety of dining and entertainment choices everyday. Some of the specialty restaurants were probably 4-star caliber. Service was fantastic at every level from housekeeping to bar service etc. Onboard entertainment was fair, although the first night the featured band was supposedly "Kiss" (or some loosely assembled former members of same) and if I had ever been a Kiss fan I would have gone to check it out. I'm assuming that Gene Simmons was *not* among the performers. On the minus side, nearly everything was extra. The basic fare included unlimited dining in the Market Cafe', essentially a buffet that is pretty similar to the buffets found in Las Vegas casinos. There was also a sit-down restaurant or two where there was no cover charge- but we opted to dine at the steakhouse, the Asian restaurant, the French restaurant, etc for every meal except breakfast and there was an upcharge of about $20-$40 per meal for the privilege. Drinks were extra, and were not cheap. Even soda pop was extra, and we paid $44 for a decent but far from incredible bottle of Napa Valley Pinot Joir on our last night underway. There were "art auctions" every day, preceded by liberal quantities of free champagne. (All sales were final) :-) The relatively low fare was offset by a non-stop sales environment. The ship's photographer was in everybody's face all the time, and pictures were posted so that passengers enamored with their own appearance could buy almost unlimited numbers of poses for $20 per print. The Cruise line even hired a "shopping consultant", that held seminars on finding the best values in Skagway, Juneau, and Ketchikan- and to nobody's extreme surprise the best values were said to be at the NCL owned shops in each of those ports. To comply with the Jones act, we had to stop in Prince Rupert en route back to Seattle. NCL apparently doesn't own any shops in Prince Rupert, as the shopping consultant reportedly told the ladies in her audience that there was "no shopping of any consequence in Prince Rupert." Beware the ship's casino. Odds are abysmal for slots, video poker, or any other games with adjustable payouts.....nobody is going to get upset about losing too much money and go across the street to the next casino. Odds are same as anywhere else for Blackjack, poker, roulette (lousy odds, roulette), etc. SE Alaska is rapidly becoming Disnified. Take Ketchikan, for example. The guide in Ketchikan that took us river rafting told us that the only thing really keeping the economy going there these days is the cruise ship business. He said, "Several years ago WalMart came to town and almost immediately put nearly all the Mom and Pop stores in downtwon Ketchikan out of business. Most of the downtown area was for rent, with no takers. The cruise ship lines came in and quietly rented up all the vacant store fronts, opened a lot of jewelry and souvenier shops, and then started bringing boat loads of tourists to Ketchikan to shop in the stores that are owned by the cruise companies. There are something like 6000 permanent residents of Ketchikan, but a lot of days in the summer we get four cruise ships in port that bring in about 10,000 tourists. That brings in another few thousand workers who live here May- September to work in the tour businesses and staff the souvenier shops. That creates a seasonal housing shortage and drives rents out of sight during the summer months. By the first of October they load up all the inventory from all the shops and relocate it to the Caribbean, and all of the seasonal workers go home. Then it's all over until the following spring." We heard similar remarks in Skagway, where a guide that took us for a hike up (a relatvely easy section of) the Chilkoot trail remarked that there are less than 10 businesses in downtown Skagway that stay open during the winter months. Did see a grizzly bear during our Chilkoot trail adventure----but not really up close and personal. The bear was feeding on something in a grassy meadow on the other side of the river, certainly no closer than 100 yards away and maybe even a bit farther. We got a good look at his head and the hump on his back, but the rest of the bear was hidden in the vegetation----what a beautiful tawny brown color he was. Several people sighted the smaller and more common black bears on various beaches, etc, but I didn't personally see a black bear on this trip. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Tim" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 23, 5:30 am, Short Wave Sportfishing Mine stays green all year long.- Hide quoted text - Astro-turf??? Nope, as my buddy in England told the wife, when she commented on green it was. It's the Piddl'n rain. Always piddl'n rian. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. What was interesting was the Eagle Glacier outside Seward, AK. There are markers as you hike the trail to the glacier of where the face was over the years. From 1917-1926 was the major retreat. Maybe 300 yards. Tells me it is not all mankinds fault. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 24, 11:22?am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. What was interesting was the Eagle Glacier outside Seward, AK. There are markers as you hike the trail to the glacier of where the face was over the years. From 1917-1926 was the major retreat. Maybe 300 yards. Tells me it is not all mankinds fault.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's normal for individual glaciers to advance and retreat. Always has been, for millions of years. What is so unusual about current global climate conditions is that nearly all glaciers are receding at once. Many are disappearing entirely, and no new glaciers are appearing to take their place Yes, there *are* exceptions to the prevailing conditions of glacial retreat, just enough to prove the rule. I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem. Nobody is well served by side-tracking this scientific concern into an "us vs. them" political snot fight. If things come down as they well might, nobody is going to be spared the consequences simply because he or she voted for the prevailing candidate in the most recent election. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:47:23 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem http://tinyurl.com/262px5 |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:47:23 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem http://tinyurl.com/262px5 Doesn't pass muster, who trusts those Danes? 8) |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jun 24, 11:22?am, "Calif Bill" wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message ups.com... On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. What was interesting was the Eagle Glacier outside Seward, AK. There are markers as you hike the trail to the glacier of where the face was over the years. From 1917-1926 was the major retreat. Maybe 300 yards. Tells me it is not all mankinds fault.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - It's normal for individual glaciers to advance and retreat. Always has been, for millions of years. What is so unusual about current global climate conditions is that nearly all glaciers are receding at once. Many are disappearing entirely, and no new glaciers are appearing to take their place Yes, there *are* exceptions to the prevailing conditions of glacial retreat, just enough to prove the rule. I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem. Nobody is well served by side-tracking this scientific concern into an "us vs. them" political snot fight. If things come down as they well might, nobody is going to be spared the consequences simply because he or she voted for the prevailing candidate in the most recent election. I thought the Republicans and Jesus were going to protect us. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 19:49:17 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: On Jun 23, 4:47?pm, John H. wrote: On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 13:13:18 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: On Jun 22, 2:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... Just got back from Alaska. On one leg of our cruise ship vacation we motored up Endicott Arm, (east of Juneau) and got up fairly close to the Daws glacier. (Got to hand it to the Captain, I would never have thought anybody would attempt to run a vessel of that size up through a snakey fjord filled with ice bergs, but he did). A lot of the passengers on this cruise seemed to hail from the south and the midwest. Every time a whale would spout or somebody would spot an eagle, a dolphin, etc there would be a chorus of oohs and aahs and cameras would be snapping madly. (The scenery was a lot like Puget Sound or SW BC, only a lot less populated, so it wasn't quite as stunning or surprising for residents of the Pacific NW). While stopped in sight of the glacier, one of the ship's Norwegian officers gave a lecture over the PA system about glaciers. How they form, why they're blue at the bottom, how many there are, etc. Everybody listened with at least moderate interest until the officer began mentioning the number of glaciers that have retreated substantially or disappeared in Glacier National Park during the last several years. You would have thought he had announced, "We support Hillary for president." The crowd got pretty lippy. Comments like "Who the hell is up on the bridge, Al Gore?" (and some worse) were frequently heard. It was pretty obvious that the negative reaction was *political*, not scientific. The telling moment, for me, occured when the officer mentioned that "as recently as 10,000 years ago much of the earth was covered by a sheet of ice." Once person standing immediately behind me grumbled "Not according to the Bible!", and another bystander confirmed that sentiment by stating, "I guess it all depends on what you believe." Indeed. As always, a solid belief or disbelief is unlikely to be swayed by anything as trivial as actual evidence- on either side of the question. Maybe it was the Norwegian accent that got on people's nerves. Other than the politics, what did you think of the cruise line. Would it be worth a trip to Seattle to take such a cruise on the Norwegian Line?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I'd recommend the cruise to anybody, especially folks from some of the more geographically remote areas of the country and for whom nearly all of the sights and experiences will be entirely new. We booked on NCL, one of the "freestyle" cruise lines. Pluses and minuses of the format: On the plus side, a wide variety of dining and entertainment choices everyday. Some of the specialty restaurants were probably 4-star caliber. Service was fantastic at every level from housekeeping to bar service etc. Onboard entertainment was fair, although the first night the featured band was supposedly "Kiss" (or some loosely assembled former members of same) and if I had ever been a Kiss fan I would have gone to check it out. I'm assuming that Gene Simmons was *not* among the performers. On the minus side, nearly everything was extra. The basic fare included unlimited dining in the Market Cafe', essentially a buffet that is pretty similar to the buffets found in Las Vegas casinos. There was also a sit-down restaurant or two where there was no cover charge- but we opted to dine at the steakhouse, the Asian restaurant, the French restaurant, etc for every meal except breakfast and there was an upcharge of about $20-$40 per meal for the privilege. Drinks were extra, and were not cheap. Even soda pop was extra, and we paid $44 for a decent but far from incredible bottle of Napa Valley Pinot Joir on our last night underway. There were "art auctions" every day, preceded by liberal quantities of free champagne. (All sales were final) :-) The relatively low fare was offset by a non-stop sales environment. The ship's photographer was in everybody's face all the time, and pictures were posted so that passengers enamored with their own appearance could buy almost unlimited numbers of poses for $20 per print. The Cruise line even hired a "shopping consultant", that held seminars on finding the best values in Skagway, Juneau, and Ketchikan- and to nobody's extreme surprise the best values were said to be at the NCL owned shops in each of those ports. To comply with the Jones act, we had to stop in Prince Rupert en route back to Seattle. NCL apparently doesn't own any shops in Prince Rupert, as the shopping consultant reportedly told the ladies in her audience that there was "no shopping of any consequence in Prince Rupert." Beware the ship's casino. Odds are abysmal for slots, video poker, or any other games with adjustable payouts.....nobody is going to get upset about losing too much money and go across the street to the next casino. Odds are same as anywhere else for Blackjack, poker, roulette (lousy odds, roulette), etc. SE Alaska is rapidly becoming Disnified. Take Ketchikan, for example. The guide in Ketchikan that took us river rafting told us that the only thing really keeping the economy going there these days is the cruise ship business. He said, "Several years ago WalMart came to town and almost immediately put nearly all the Mom and Pop stores in downtwon Ketchikan out of business. Most of the downtown area was for rent, with no takers. The cruise ship lines came in and quietly rented up all the vacant store fronts, opened a lot of jewelry and souvenier shops, and then started bringing boat loads of tourists to Ketchikan to shop in the stores that are owned by the cruise companies. There are something like 6000 permanent residents of Ketchikan, but a lot of days in the summer we get four cruise ships in port that bring in about 10,000 tourists. That brings in another few thousand workers who live here May- September to work in the tour businesses and staff the souvenier shops. That creates a seasonal housing shortage and drives rents out of sight during the summer months. By the first of October they load up all the inventory from all the shops and relocate it to the Caribbean, and all of the seasonal workers go home. Then it's all over until the following spring." We heard similar remarks in Skagway, where a guide that took us for a hike up (a relatvely easy section of) the Chilkoot trail remarked that there are less than 10 businesses in downtown Skagway that stay open during the winter months. Did see a grizzly bear during our Chilkoot trail adventure----but not really up close and personal. The bear was feeding on something in a grassy meadow on the other side of the river, certainly no closer than 100 yards away and maybe even a bit farther. We got a good look at his head and the hump on his back, but the rest of the bear was hidden in the vegetation----what a beautiful tawny brown color he was. Several people sighted the smaller and more common black bears on various beaches, etc, but I didn't personally see a black bear on this trip. Thanks for all that! On the Disney cruise, all the various restaurants were included in the price, except one. It had about a $25 surcharge, but it was well worth it. I've heard that Disney is planning an Alaskan cruise sometime in the fairly near future. Maybe I'll just wait until then to try that trip. Thanks again, Chuck, for all the info. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 24, 12:56?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:47:23 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem http://tinyurl.com/262px5 Dueling websites? Yawn......... :-). |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 18:28:00 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: On Jun 24, 12:56?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 11:47:23 -0700, Chuck Gould wrote: I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem http://tinyurl.com/262px5 Dueling websites? Yawn......... :-). Ah yes - I see. It's all our fault. ~~ yawn ~~ |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
Yeah and that record breaking deep freeze of a winter we just had. Al gore
can suck a dick. -- Steve Barker "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Temps in the low '60s, reasonable humidity, winds NNW at 10, occasional rain showers... Man, this Global Warming is wonderful! Heh, heh, heh... |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 24, 6:31?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Ah yes - I see. It's all our fault. ~~ yawn ~~ wrote: I don't know how much of it, if any, is mankind's fault--- but the results will definitely be mankind's problem It may not be all our fault. May not any of it be our fault. My point all along is that this is a scientific issue that is still open to debate. That debate should be scientific, not political. Pointing out the 10-15% of scientists who disagree with the herd and pointing out instances when some scientist or another was wrong about previous climate predictions won't erase the very real possibility that there's a problem. That was the basis of my "dueling websites" comment. Everbody could link to hundreds of sites on both sides of th issues, some of them prepared by people with exceptional scientific credentials that exceed even those of Sean Hannity, Al Gore, or Rush Limbaugh. :-) Way back in the days of yore....there was one lonely voice crying out that the earth revolved around the sun. All the evidence available at that time and popularly accepted by the established religious and political powers seemed to indicate that the earth was the geographical "center" of the universe. That one lonely voice was right... One side or the other in the global warming debate is right. I don't know which it is, and you don't either. The three main questions a 1. Is the climate changing? Almost any reasonable person would have to answer yes because the climate has always been in a state of change for as far back as we can detect. 2. If the climate is changing, is it changing differently or more rapidly than it has in the past? 3. If the climate is changing differently or more rapidly than in the past, is there something man should do or should stop doing as a result? The tough aspect is that it's going to take 100 years to know who's right about climate change.....and in the meantime it's silly (IMO) to get all worked up on a personal basis or start characterizing people who disagree with your personal guess on the issue as a bunch of bad guys. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Jun 24, 8:59?pm, "Steve Barker"
wrote: Yeah and that record breaking deep freeze of a winter we just had. Al gore can suck a dick. -- Steve Barker Does that "record breaking deep freeze winter" you meniton support a position that the climate cannot be changing? Just because the *globe* may be warming, that wouldn't have to mean that parts of it might not get colder. In fact, if you study up on the way that temperature differentials between the poles and the tropics generate winds and currents and how those winds and currents contribute to local weather patterns, a warmer overall global temperature can easily result in weird weather in certain sections of the planet. Warmer temperatures at the poles, regardless of cause, can really screw up winds and currents, and when the polar temperatures rise more than the equatorial temperatures that changes the dynamic of the thermal differential. Tidal currents will remain pretty much the same, and those are more prominent in coastal areas than convection currents. The biggest risk to boating could be a marked increase in the frequency or intensity of gale force winds, or maybe a serious decline in the normal amount of wind and that would upset sailors a lot. I found the basic theory of wind and current generation not all that tricky a subject to tackle, and it comes in handy when listening to marine weather forecasts and noting the changes between high and low pressure cells. |
I'm loving this Global Warming...
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:36:27 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote: Pointing out the 10-15% of scientists who disagree with the herd and pointing out instances when some scientist or another was wrong about previous climate predictions won't erase the very real possibility that there's a problem That's the point Chuck. While you may think it's 10-15% of scientists, and it's certainly presented that way, it's more like 50/60% of scientists disagree. There isn't any consensus even amoung those who even think that somehow greenhouse gases are causing global warming. The simple truth is this - you can either believe in Global Warming or not believe in Global Warming. You obviously believe in it despite evidence to the contrary. So does Gene. And I have no problem with that. However, every time I, or others, bring up evidence to the contrary, it's dismissed - politely and reasonably to be sure, but it's still dismissed under the quise that the evidence isn't in, but.... Just be honest - you believe in it, you think it's humanity's fault and go from there. I would also point out that in the history of science, the "deniers" of established wisdom are usually the ones that are eventually proven right. Think Galileo Galilei and go from there. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:06 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com