MC

She never had the abs that were painted in (the white suit picture). She never had those slim hips either (except for after the liquid diet, but only for a few days). I know that television adds 10 pounds, but so does photography. I do have to give her credit for at least owning up to the weight gain. (I do think she weighs more than 200 though). Once again, it's all about her. What better way to kick off a new year than to be the focus of another scheme to get people involved. But hey, if people do get healthy... I'm all for it.

I know, it was really starting to get to me. She'd sit in chairs with solid sides, wear full skirts, be filmed from the neck up. Her magazine covers were always airbrushed to make her look thinner. I think she finally was forced to make a public statement about it. If you take our genetic factors, add menopause AND her thyroid condition.... I think we're seeing the result of that with her. Not everyone is destined to be skinny and not everyone who is overweight is unhealthy. In fact, those who are really skinny are sometimes more unhealthy than larger people. I wish we would really focus on health and not just the what we think is the outer manifestation of health.

Oprah Winfrey says she weighs 200 pounds Dec 9, 11:27 AM (ET) By CARYN ROUSSEAU CHICAGO (AP) - When it comes to her weight, Oprah Winfrey has always been straightforward. The talk show queen continues the honesty, saying in the January issue of "O" magazine out Tuesday that she now weighs 200 pounds and has "fallen off the wagon" when it comes to healthy living. "I'm mad at myself," Winfrey writes in an article provided early to The Associated Press by Harpo Productions. "I'm embarrassed," she writes. "I can't believe that after all these years, all the things I know how to do, I'm still talking about my weight. I look at my thinner self and think, 'How did I let this happen again?'" In the piece, Winfrey, 54, details her recent struggles with an out-of-balance thyroid and how the condition made her develop "a fear of working out." She says she's added 40 pounds to her frame since she weighed 160 pounds in 2006. "Yes, you're adding correctly; that means the dreaded 2-0-0," Winfrey writes. "I was so frustrated I started eating whatever I wanted - and that's never good." Winfrey also writes that her goal is no longer to be thin; instead, she wants to be strong, healthy and fit. She hopes to get started with her upcoming "Best Life Week," starting Jan. 5 with an episode of "The Oprah Winfrey Show" during which she is expected to talk candidly about her weight. Winfrey, who is chairman of Harpo Inc., famously wheeled a wagon loaded with fat onto the set of her talk show in 1988 to represent a 67-pound weight loss while wearing a pair of size 10 Calvin Klein jeans. She had lost the pounds with a liquid protein diet. "I had literally starved myself for four months - not a morsel of food," Winfrey recalled in 2005. "Two hours after that show, I started eating to celebrate - of course, within two days those jeans no longer fit!" Winfrey's weight has yo-yoed to the delight of the tabloid press ever since. She weighed as many as 237 pounds and by late 1990 acknowledged she had regained most of the 67 pounds, saying "I'll never diet again." In 1994, she finished the Marine Corps Marathon and by 1996 hired personal trainer Bob Greene, saying her roller-coaster weight saga was over. But now, 20 years since the Calvin Klein jeans episode, Winfrey finds herself tipping the scales again, telling AP Television last week that she has yet to choose a gown for President-elect Barack Obama's inaugural ball next month. "I had a dress on the vision board, but I'm not sure that's gonna fit," Winfrey said. "So I have to work on something else." In the latest "O" magazine article, Winfrey writes that she hit rock bottom when she wanted to skip out on an April 26 taping with Cher and Tina Turner in Las Vegas. "I felt like a fat cow," Winfrey writes. "I wanted to disappear." Winfrey's weight and height put her body mass index at 31.8, which is obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC says people who are obese are "at higher risk for chronic conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes and high cholesterol." It seems Winfrey is aware of the health risks, inviting both Greene and Dr. Mehmet Oz to her show during the first week of January, along with spirituality experts, sex therapists and financial expert Suze Orman. Winfrey also is expected to discuss her weight on her XM satellite radio station's "The Gayle King Show" on Jan. 5 and will host interactive live Web casts at Oprah.com the week of Jan. 12 to 16 every night at 9 p.m. EST. Winfrey, an admitted food addict, sounds almost apologetic in her article. "I definitely wasn't setting an example," she writes. "I was talking the talk, but I wasn't walking the walk. And that was very disappointing to me." --- On the Net: http://www.oprah.com

Rare 50 year Arctic Blast Sets Sights On Southern California. Joshua Young Monday, December 8, 2008 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - December 8, 2008 (OWSweather.com) Rare 50 year Arctic Blast Sets Sights On Southern California. With a week away, and a sure sign of things to come, OWSweather.com is making preparations on the server to handle the traffic from this next event. UJEAS is in line with the majority if not all the other models in keeping a near historical arctic air mass into the Southern California region. With a warm November, Southern California is finally ready for cold storms to make their way in. Resort level snow will be likely next week, and in pretty hefty amounts if things stay on track. OWSweather.com Meteorologist Kevin Martin predicts a 50 year event. While Martin is usually conservative on these events, the pattern highly favors it. "We are in a pre-1950 type pattern, "said Martin. "We know we are due for a winter storm sometime this year. The type we may be dealing with will be ranked up there with the known years before 1950, which set record low daytime temperatures into the forecast region. With this, may come low elevation snow." Forecaster Cameron Venable is seeing very cold temperatures in the Los Angeles areas as well. Torrance is not usually known for winter weather, thus making this an interesting event for Venable to track. "Temperatures in Siberia, Russia will be -81 degrees this week, "said Martin. "With those type of temperatures the arctic air mass has to spill somewhere. Our answer of the exact track will become more clear this week. All residents in the mountain communities should prepare this week for very cold, winter weather, with snow." Indications are a second, colder storm could hit near the 18th-22nd time-frame. The details on that will have to be sorted out. OWSweather.com staff More information: www.OWSweather.com

While I agree that Rosie is seen as divisive, whose brilliant idea was it to debut this show on the busiest travel day of the year, and opposite Barbara Walters/Barack Obama? (Were they in the same time slot?) Even so.... they would have been smarter to debut this show at a different time. Rosie used to be fun. I think The View killed her career.

Saturday, November 15, 2008 Film-makers taking on our 'global warming hysteria' HARRY McGEE A new Irish film claims that climate change guru Al Gore is an alarmist and that those who think they are saving the planet are only hurting the poor IF THE ADVANCE publicity is anything to go by, Not Evil Just Wrong will do for Al Gore what Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 did for George W Bush. "This is the film Al Gore and Hollywood don't want you to see," declares the website for the latest work by film-makers Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer. The site even features a big picture of Gore, with his lips in the photograph seemingly digitally enhanced to make them look like Heath Ledger's Joker from the latest Batman film. The website goes on to say that their latest film - which takes on what are described as global warming alarmists - is "the most controversial documentary of the year". Indeed, it could very well be the most controversial. And Al Gore and Hollywood may well not want you to see it. And in that respect, Gore and co are actually succeeding for the moment. Because there is no completed film. Not yet anyway. McElhinney and McAleer have raised almost $1 million (€799,000) but need a total of $4.5m (€3.6m) to allow for a full cinema release. They say they were acutely disappointed at being turned down for funding by the Irish Film Board, especially its conclusion that it was "repetitive and creatively thin". Instead, they have gone onto the internet hoping to solicit donations in the style of Barack Obama. The finished product will be around 90 minutes long. Both film-makers rebut the Film Board's criticism by pointing out that a near-complete version of the film has been chosen in the audience category at the Amsterdam Film Festival later this month. However, for now, there is no finished product. And that creates a bit of a difficulty. The merits of the case put forward in the film can only be judged - for now - on a short trailer and on the spirited arguments put forward by its two creators, and not on the work itself. McElhinney and McAleer, who are a married couple, are former journalists. McElhinney broke the Tristan Dowse story and the questionable money-making industry that had grown up around adoptions abroad. McAleer is a former journalist with the Sunday Times and the Financial Times, who worked as a correspondent in Bucharest for a number of years. THIS IS NOT the first time they have courted controversy. An earlier documentary, Mine Your Own Business, contended that the actions of environmentalists were destroying communities and lives in developing countries. A screening in the US was picketed by environmental groups. And the documentary was also criticised because it was 70 per cent funded by Gabriel Resources, the Canadian mining company that wanted to develop an open pit gold mine in an impoverished village in Romania. This surely compromised the editorial objectivity of the film. On the contrary, McAleer says. He points out that it is stated clearly in the first five minutes of the film where the funding came from. He also asserts that the funder had no editorial control and only saw the film after completion. But why fund it then? "They saw what I had written [about the village] in the Financial Times and saw that I was representing it in a fair way. Also they had a good story to tell. They were the only people who could save this village from being destroyed by environmentalists." The latest work, when it appears, will tackle the same subject but on a far more ambitious - and provocative - scale. They will set out to prove the true cost of what they call "global warming hysteria", which they claim damages the lives of vulnerable people. Shooting took place in Ireland, Uganda, China, England, France and the US. The film, as outlined by both, explores three strands. The first looks at previous "scares", namely the widespread ban on the use of the anti-malaria pesticide DDT, because of its effect on the environment. The ban was highly controversial because there was evidence that its absence actually increased the incidence of malaria in poorer countries. Both describe the ban as appalling and a disgrace, putting the lives of birds and wildlife ahead of human beings who died from disease-carrying mosquitoes. The second strand explores what they contend are "flaws" in the climate change argument. It is clear that the biggest "flaw" from their perspective has a name and it is Al Gore. "We look at the bigger errors that are in An Inconvenient Truth," says McElhinney, who asserts that scientists are not settled on climate change, and there is not incontrovertible evidence that it is happening. It's not possible to gainsay the film. But you wonder does the logic follow all the way through. Gore still believes in a ban on DDT, says McElhinney, arguing that this compromises his views on climate change. Not necessarily. They also explore nine "flaws" in Gore's film, established by the High Court in Britain during a civil case. Their major contentions include criticism of the famous inverted hockey stick graph which purported to show constant emissions for many centuries and big increases in CO2 emissions since 1900. That model completely neglected medieval warming (proven) and the little ice age from the 16th century to 1850 (also proven), they argue. IN BRIEF, THEIR other main assertions are: there has been no global warming since 1995; the polar bear population is not under threat from climate change but from human hunters; they also say that the Arctic and Greenland glaciers have been receding since 1850, long before the invention of SUVs; and, finally, that the UN's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) takes issue with Al Gore's contention that sea levels will rise by 20ft (more like 19 inches, says the IPCC). None of these arguments are new. It is the view of critics of global warming that the Earth's climate is still recovering from the Little Ice Age after it ended around 1850. A quick Google of any of the above issues does point to potential flaws (ie too much reliance on modelling, projecting and extrapolation) but the problem is that the contrary argument often teeters on a rickety foundation. The third strand is McAleer's argument that the measures proposed to tackle climate change will cause crisis and chaos. The world would collapse without fossil fuel, he says. "The cure could be worse than the disease." He is particularly scathing of Al Gore's call for a total ban on fossil fuels in a decade, which would be a disaster, leading to millions of people being driven into poverty. The views are certainly contrarian. But there are some eminent scientists among the contributors, including Dr Syun-Ichi Akasofu, former director of the International Arctic Research Centre and Prof Richard Lindzen, an atmospheric physicist from MIT, both of whom are sceptics. The authority of all the arguments will be severely tested. One is mindful of Martin Durkin's controversial The Great Global Warming Swindle for Channel 4 that set about debunking global warming as an overstated theory. The film was criticised by the UK TV regulator (Ofcom) for inaccuracies, and the Ofcom decision gave Durkin's critics a field day in attacking the credibility of his film. Do McElhinney and McAleer themselves reject climate change, reject the need to cut down on our dependency on oil? "The idea that CO2 causes climate change or causes global warming - let's keep it clear - is not settled," says McElhinney. "The idea of dramatically altering the way we live would be a mistake until more information has been gathered." Both believe that there is no panic, and that the world has 300 years (until coal is exhausted) to come up with alternative sources of energy. They are right about one thing - it will be very controversial. Their arguments will be unremittingly scrutinised, leaving only two possible outcomes: the film will debunk and expose, or be itself debunked and exposed. © 2008 The Irish Times

The world has never seen such freezing heat By Christopher Booker Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 16/11/2008 A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore's chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record. This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China's official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its "worst snowstorm ever". In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years. So what explained the anomaly? GISS's computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running. The error was so glaring that when it was reported on the two blogs - run by the US meteorologist Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, the Canadian computer analyst who won fame for his expert debunking of the notorious "hockey stick" graph - GISS began hastily revising its figures. This only made the confusion worse because, to compensate for the lowered temperatures in Russia, GISS claimed to have discovered a new "hotspot" in the Arctic - in a month when satellite images were showing Arctic sea-ice recovering so fast from its summer melt that three weeks ago it was 30 per cent more extensive than at the same time last year. A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission: the figures published by Dr Hansen's institute are not only one of the four data sets that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher temperatures than the others. If there is one scientist more responsible than any other for the alarm over global warming it is Dr Hansen, who set the whole scare in train back in 1988 with his testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore. Again and again, Dr Hansen has been to the fore in making extreme claims over the dangers of climate change. (He was recently in the news here for supporting the Greenpeace activists acquitted of criminally damaging a coal-fired power station in Kent, on the grounds that the harm done to the planet by a new power station would far outweigh any damage they had done themselves.) Yet last week's latest episode is far from the first time Dr Hansen's methodology has been called in question. In 2007 he was forced by Mr Watts and Mr McIntyre to revise his published figures for US surface temperatures, to show that the hottest decade of the 20th century was not the 1990s, as he had claimed, but the 1930s. Another of his close allies is Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, who recently startled a university audience in Australia by claiming that global temperatures have recently been rising "very much faster" than ever, in front of a graph showing them rising sharply in the past decade. In fact, as many of his audience were aware, they have not been rising in recent years and since 2007 have dropped. Dr Pachauri, a former railway engineer with no qualifications in climate science, may believe what Dr Hansen tells him. But whether, on the basis of such evidence, it is wise for the world's governments to embark on some of the most costly economic measures ever proposed, to remedy a problem which may actually not exist, is a question which should give us all pause for thought. Source is HERE.

Of course he doesn't want an official role - then he'd have to give up his cushy little deal with private corporations - and he'd be under more scrutiny to clean up his own energy useage. Gore says no to 'Climate Czar' role Tom LoBianco (Contact) and S.A. Miller (Contact) Thursday, November 13, 2008 President-elect Barack Obama's transition team is flirting with creating a White House "Climate Czar," but climate change crusader Al Gore says he doesn't want the job. The Obama team declined to comment on such a post, even as environmentalists and power industry executives say it's being widely discussed inside the transition offices as a way to spur a clean energy industry, which Mr. Obama has promised will ween the U.S. from foreign oil and create millions of "green jobs." Obama transition chief John Podesta promoted a similar idea earlier in his role as president of the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank. Mr. Podesta authored a white paper calling for an Energy Security Council within the White House to oversee climate change and clean energy initiatives. The czar and the council would coordinate agencies, including the Energy and Interior departments and the Environmental Protection Agency. Related stories: • EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Military worries about climate change • Obama picks team for economic summit The obvious choice to lead the council is Mr. Gore, whose campaign to address climate change earned him the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. But the former vice president is taking a pass. "Former Vice President Gore does not intend to seek or accept any formal position in government," Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider said. "He feels very strong right now that the best thing for him to do is to build support for the bold changes that we have to make to solve the climate crisis." Mr. Obama foreshadowed the new post on the campaign trail in April when he told a voter that Mr. Gore would be offered a special Cabinet post overseeing climate change. "Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem," Mr. Obama said. With Mr. Gore out of the running for an administration job, leading candidates for the post likely include former EPA chief Carol M. Browner, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano and Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. Other names mentioned for czar or membership in the energy council include World Resources Institute President Jonathan Lash, former Pennsylvania Environment Secretary Kathleen McGinty and California Air Resources Board chief Mary D. Nichols. The Obama transition team declined to comment on administration jobs or who would fill them, stressing instead the next president's commitment to fulfilling campaign promises for clean energy. "Obama has outlined an aggressive energy and climate agenda and will put the resources in place in his administration to achieve those goals," Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said. Environmental advocacy groups are clamoring for the new White House post to raise the profile of energy and environmental policy. "There's clearly a pent-up demand for things that got blocked during the Bush years," Sierra Club spokesman Josh Dorner said. Mr. Obama, taking a page from Mr. Gore's script, has argued that an energy policy strikes the confluence of economic, national security and environmental challenges facing the country. "Finding the new driver of our economy is going to be critical. There´s no better driver that pervades all aspects of our economy than a new energy economy," Mr. Obama told Time magazine shortly before the election. "That´s going to be my No. 1 priority when I get into office."

Um, no. I can't believe there are actually people out there who don't think that Jake is Toothy Hugh is a popular guess for one about being in love with his assistant, and probably a few others--can't remember right now which items were Ted and which were other gossipers...... Just too awesome not to be gay! I saw him on Broadway in The Boy from Oz (The Peter Allen story). He blew me away!! That's when my mind opened to the possibility that he could be gay. Then he marries a much-older woman AND adopts their kids. That pretty much seals it for me. Lots of gay men are extremely macho without a trace of femininity. So it's really possible that Hugh could be gay. IMO.

Dosen't he own a company that sells "carbon offset credits" to companies? I looked it up. Wow, why isn't this more well-known? From World Net Daily THE HEAT IS ON Gore's 'carbon offsets' paid to firm he owns Critics say justification for energy-rich lifestyle serves as way for former VP to profit Posted: March 02, 2007 4:13 pm Eastern © 2008 WorldNetDaily.com Al Gore defends his extraordinary personal energy usage by telling critics he maintains a "carbon neutral" lifestyle by buying "carbon offsets," but the company that receives his payments turns out to be partly owned and chaired by the former vice president himself. Gore has built a "green money-making machine capable of eventually generating billions of dollars for investors, including himself, but he set it up so that the average Joe can't afford to play on Gore's terms," writes blogger Dan Riehl. Gore has described the lifestyle he and his wife Tipper live as "carbon neutral," meaning he tries to offset any energy usage, including plane flights and car trips, by "purchasing verifiable reductions in CO2 elsewhere." But it turns out he pays for his extra-large carbon footprint through Generation Investment Management, a London-based company with offices in Washington, D.C., for which he serves as chairman. The company was established to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating "global warming," reports blogger Bill Hobbs. Generation Investment Management's U.S. branch is headed by a former Gore staffer and fund-raiser, Peter S. Knight, who once was the target of probes by the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice. Hobbs points out Gore stands to make a lot of money from his promotion of the alleged "global warming" threat, which is disputed by many mainstream scientists. "In other words, he 'buys' his 'carbon offsets' from himself, through a transaction designed to boost his own investments and return a profit to himself," Hobbs writes. "To be blunt, Gore doesn't buy 'carbon offsets' through Generation Investment Management – he buys stocks." As WND reported, Gore, whose film warning of a coming cataclysm due to man-made "global warming" won two Oscars, has a mansion in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville that consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, citing data from the Nashville Electric Service. The think tanks says since the release of Gore's film, the former presidential candidate's energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kilowatt-hours per month in 2005, to 18,400 per month in 2006.

Just when I thought he had crawled back into his hole, embarrassed by the fact that scientists are now saying that climate change is cyclical and has gone on for centuries... he's back. Emboldened by the Democratic win (which he twists in a way that says that Obama's win is really about Gore), he now wants to get back into his pulpit. Internet revolution that elected Obama could save Earth: Gore Nov 8 12:31 PM US/Eastern Gore: Internet Revolution That Elected Obama Could Save Earth Former US vice president Al Gore said an Internet revolution carrying Barack Obama to the White House should now focus its power on stopping Earth's climate crisis. The one-time presidential contender turned environmental champion told Web 2.0 Summit goers in San Francisco Friday that technology has provided tools to save the planet while creating jobs and stimulating the crippled economy. "The young people who have been inspired by Barack Obama's campaign and the movement that powered Barack Obama's campaign want a purpose," Gore said. "One of the reasons we were all thrilled Tuesday night is it was pretty obvious this was a collectively intelligent decision." The Internet's critical role in Democrat Obama's victory in the presidential race against Republican John McCain was a "great blow for victory" in addressing a "democracy crisis" stifling action against climate change, Gore said. The Web has "revolutionized" nearly every aspect of running for US president and delivered an "electrifying redemption" of the founding national principle that all people are created equal, according to Gore. "Some week," Gore said in greeting to an audience that leapt to its feet cheering. "It really was overwhelming. It couldn't have happened without the Internet." Obama's victory, seen by many as a repudiation of policies of president George W. Bush, was validation of sorts for Gore, who lost to Bush in a controversial election outcome in 2000. "Belated redemption is part of what we are celebrating this week," Gore said. Since leaving politics Gore has been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his relentless efforts to combat climate change and starred in an Academy Award-winning global warming documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." He also founded Current TV, a cable television operation that taps into user-generated videos and news coverage fed to its website. The one-time newspaper reporter said his reasons for creating Current included a belief in the need to "democratize television media." "One of the main reasons why our political system has not been operating well until this election is the unhealthy influence of the television medium as it has operated," Gore said. "The Internet comes in and democratizes information again and it is so exciting. All the vibrant forms of information are living on the Internet but TVs are still dampening it." Current TV teamed with Twitter and Digg on election night to weave feeds from the popular Internet websites into its coverage of the vote. The Web has the potential to "revolutionize almost every aspect" of running for US president, according to Gore. He believes that social activism made possible by people connecting and sharing information online is in its infancy. "What happened in the election opens a full new range of possibilities and now is the time to really move swiftly to exploit these new possibilities," Gore said of turning the power of the Internet to cooling global warming. Gore said Obama should announce a national goal of getting all US electric power from renewable and non-carbon energy within the next decade and spend the billions necessary to build an "electrinet" smart power grid. "Web 2.0 has to have a purpose" Gore said. "The purpose I would urge is to bring about a higher level of consciousness about our relationship to this planet and the imminent danger we face. We have everything we need to save it."

No, I think they're telling the truth when they said they only did skin tone work. We're reacting to her: 1) Hairline. Hers is normally very horizontal, but she softens it with either a middle part, or side-swept bangs. 2) Hair color. It's obviously a wig and not a good one. 3) Brows. They're definitely darker than usual, and shaped differently than her own. This makes a huge difference.

MIT scientists baffled by global warming theory, contradicts scientific data Trendwatch By Rick C. Hodgin Thursday, October 30, 2008 09:55 Boston (MA) - Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man's contributions. Methane - powerful greenhouse gas The two lead authors of a paper published in this week's Geophysical Review Letters, Matthew Rigby and Ronald Prinn, the TEPCO Professor of Atmospheric Chemistry in MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Science, state that as a result of the increase, several million tons of new methane is present in the atmosphere. Methane accounts for roughly one-fifth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, though its effect is 25x greater than that of carbon dioxide. Its impact on global warming comes from the reflection of the sun's light back to the Earth (like a greenhouse). Methane is typically broken down in the atmosphere by the free radical hydroxyl (OH), a naturally occuring process. This atmospheric cleanser has been shown to adjust itself up and down periodically, and is believed to account for the lack of increases in methane levels in Earth's atmosphere over the past ten years despite notable simultaneous increases by man. More study Prinn has said, "The next step will be to study [these changes] using a very high-resolution atmospheric circulation model and additional measurements from other networks. The key thing is to better determine the relative roles of increased methane emission versus [an increase] in the rate of removal. Apparently we have a mix of the two, but we want to know how much of each [is responsible for the overall increase]." The primary concern now is that 2007 is long over. While the collected data from that time period reflects a simultaneous world-wide increase in emissions, observing atmospheric trends now is like observing the healthy horse running through the paddock a year after it overcame some mystery illness. Where does one even begin? And how relevant are any of the data findings at this late date? Looking back over 2007 data as it was captured may prove as ineffective if the data does not support the high resolution details such a study requires. One thing does seem very clear, however; science is only beginning to get a handle on the big picture of global warming. Findings like these tell us it's too early to know for sure if man's impact is affecting things at the political cry of "alarming rates." We may simply be going through another natural cycle of warmer and colder times - one that's been observed through a scientific analysis of the Earth to be naturally occuring for hundreds of thousands of years. Project funding Rigby and Prinn carried out this study with help from researchers at Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Bristol and Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Methane gas measurements came from the Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases Experiment (AGAGE), which is supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Australian CSIRO network.

Amazingly early... Northeast snowstorm closes major highways, schools Oct 28 08:13 PM US/Eastern PORTJERVIS, N.Y. (AP) - The first big snowstorm of the season in the Northeast closed sections of major highways Tuesday and blacked out more than 100,000 utility customers. The National Weather Service posted a winter storm warning for parts of New York state, in effect until 8 a.m. Wednesday, and issued winter storm advisories for parts of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Vermont. "It looked like a mini blizzard in October," said Joe Orlando, spokesman for the New Jersey Turnpike Authority. "We're salting the roads and we haven't even gone trick-or-treating yet." Up to a foot of snow was possible in parts of upstate New York, with wind blowing at 25 mph and gusting to 40 mph, and as much as 9 inches of snow was forecast in Vermont's mountains, the weather service said. Up to 13 inches of snow had fallen by Tuesday afternoon in Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains. Schools closed or delayed their openings in parts of Pennsylvania and New York state. New York's Thruway Authority said Interstate 84 was closed for part of the morning at the New York-Pennsylvania line in the Port Jervis area. It was reopened by late morning. Stretches of Interstate 80 in northeastern Pennsylvania were closed intermittently because of multiple tractor-trailer wrecks, state agencies said. PPL Corp. said about 39,000 of its customers in northeastern Pennsylvania lost power when the heavy, wet snow brought down trees and power lines. Utility companies in New Jersey said about 67,000 customers lost power, mostly in the northern part of the state, and New York State Electric & Gas said about 14,000 customers in southern New York counties were without electricity Tuesday evening. Arrival delays into New York's La Guardia Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport were averaging more than two hours in the middle of the afternoon because of wind. Low ceilings were delaying some flights out of Philadelphia's airport more than four hours, the Federal Aviation Administration reported. Elsewhere, light snow fell at higher elevations of the southern Appalachians. National Park Service spokesman Bob Miller said U.S. 441 through Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Tennessee and North Carolina was closed for part of the morning while crews spread sand.

I found a great timeline of how the media has covered "climate change" for the past 100 years. Fascinating reading! Click here.

This topic concerns me because there are so many extreme changes that are creeping into our society - all under the guise of reducing carbon emissions! We're told to lower our "carbon footprint". While I heartily agree that we should try to do no harm to our environment, I do believe that this planet is much more powerful than man. Plus, historians have been recording these kinds of changes for centuries. However, political agendas throw this stuff out there as a way to gain more control. I'm glad that some scientists are finally speaking out. They've been effectively muzzled for at least a decade (grant money denied if they didn't go along with the standard mantra of human-caused global warming). If all of the money and all of the energy that is directed at this "cause" were refocused onto poverty, or education, imagine the impact!

Woohoo! THANKS! It works

for the avatar settings, set the width to 74 and the height to 100 and that'll unstretch it Thanks. I found it already is at that setting. On my computer it looks just like the one in BobbyD's message. But if I use it as an avatar, it's still stretched.

As a breast cancer survivor all I can ask is really did you need to wear this tacky ass dress to a breast cancer event? Bitch buy the next size larger. Such poor taste (fashion and otherwise considering the event!). But doesn't she have a mirror in her house? She looks dreadful.

try this: Thank you! I uploaded yours to my desktop and then to my profile. It doesn't look quite like yours but he's still stunning.

Thanks to both of you. So I saved it to my desktop and uploaded it through chitchat. It's a little squashed, but it will work for now until I can find out a better way. Thanks again!

I don't know, but I would like too -- I don't know whose mind to "read."

Can anyone tell me how to get an avatar of this picture? http://bp0.blogger.com/__2ZwmFSAw_g/Ry5r48...simon+baker.jpg

I couldn't have said it any better. I agree with everything you said!

It's pretty harsh to go to the police and claim assault! No wonder they did it in their own neighborhood. So they'll get their money from the tabloids unless he can pay to shut them up. I wouldn't. I'd let them have their say and then they'll disappear. And he'll never give them the opportunity to be near him again. I'm so sad for him - for your own mother and sister to do that to you!