zn wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

When I was a Park Ranger, there was a stand of Hemlocks at the Dingman’s Falls section of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area that had never been logged. The trees there are 400 years old and 6 feet in diameter, and Hemlocks are slow growers.

I never knew you were a park ranger.

That’s right. I worked for the Department of the Interior as a Ranger for the National Park Service.

So while subversives like you were burning your draft cards, I was serving my country by pointing out poison ivy to retired people on bus tours.

And before you ask – yes, being a Ranger was exactly like this…

zn wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

So for that reason I’d prefer the GE chestnut trees be kept in orchards.

This is one of those odd things.

The american wilds are not what they would have been if Euros had not come over.

Interesting article on that:

American Forests Look Nothing Like They Did 400 Years Ago: https://www.businessinsider.com/northeastern-us-forest-transformation-2013-9

Interesting article. I’m actually surprised the change isn’t more dramatic.

It’s not just the changes in the proportion of individual species. It’s the change of the physical size of the trees.

Untouched old growth forest looks a lot different than the second generation growth forests that dominate the North East now.

Picture seeing a forest where many of the trees were 400 or 500 years old. The first Europeans would have seen White pines that rivaled Redwoods in size. When I was a Park Ranger, there was a stand of Hemlocks at the Dingman’s Falls section of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area that had never been logged. The trees there are 400 years old and 6 feet in diameter, and Hemlocks are slow growers.

Clearing land for farming and logging in general has changed all of that. That altered the relative abundance of animal species along with tree species, but it didn’t necessarily reduce all of their numbers. There are actually a lot more white-tailed deer now than when the first Europeans arrived. White-tailed deer are browsers that rely on the shoots and new growth of bushes and shrubby plants for food – something that don’t grow in great quantities in old growth forests with their tall, unbroken canopies. White-tailed deer began to thrive in the presence of cleared land and farms.

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

I bet you miss Bondi.

Yeah I do. But it’s a quiet sweet voice and I mostly just marinade in good memories.

Are you going to get another dog?

wv wrote:

Zooey wrote:

Not only do atheists die earlier, they also don’t get to go to heaven.

=============

So where will Nittany go when he dies?

w
v

What makes you think I’m going to die?

What makes you think I can die?

4chan user posted about Epstein’s death 40 minutes before it was reported in the media.

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-13/epsteins-death-first-reported-4chan-anon-claimed-hanging-cardiac-arrest

Most likely one of the first responders on the scene.

Link: https://skepchick.org/2019/08/the-real-reason-epstein-died-is-a-lot-scarier-than-murder/

When the news first broke yesterday that noted child rapist Jeffrey Epstein had died by suicide in jail, I went through a lot of emotions. It started with anger, knowing that he will never be held accountable for his crimes and his many victims will never be able to get closure. Soon my anger turned into worry that his death may end many of the investigations into his dealings and those of the people around him who enabled or even benefited from his crimes. Finally, I was filled with confusion over how this possibly could have happened. Supposedly Epstein was on suicide watch, so if precautions were being taken to prevent him from being able to die by suicide, how was able to succeed at it?

Very soon after his death was announced I logged into Facebook and Twitter and saw many people alleging that Epstein was likely murdered. I’m not talking about right-wing conspiracy theorists like our own president who is alleging Epstein was killed by Hillary Clinton (though that happened as well), but progressive friends of mine. Most of these friends are not the type of people to usually buy into a conspiracy theory, but they pointed to the long list of powerful people who would want Epstein dead and explained how suspicious it was that Epstein would have been able to die by suicide while on suicide watch.

After awhile, I started to believe too. When news later came out saying that he wasn’t actually on suicide watch, I wondered if maybe he had been purposefully taken off it in order to encourage him to die by suicide. If contradictory information is coming out of the jail, how do we even know their suicide claims are true at all? Maybe he was actually killed by a guard or inmate. Certainly the timing of his death seems convenient for many of his friends and confidants whose own crimes may have come out in the investigation against Epstein.

Although I’ve been surprised to see people who usually don’t espouse conspiracy theories dabble in them in this case, myself included, I do think there is something in particular about Epstein that causes conspiracy theories to swirl around him. The fact is, Epstein is at the center of an honest-to-god real-life conspiracy. He truly was running a sex trafficking ring with some of the most powerful people in the world as his possible conspirators, many of whom have gone to great lengths to protect him. There are also still a lot of questions over where he was getting his money from, who his clients were, and what he was actually doing for them. There is even some evidence pointing to a potential blackmail scheme, suggesting he was taping his rich, powerful friends interactions with his underage sex slaves then blackmailing them into investing with his “hedge fund” that was actually just a index fund that he used to launder his blackmail money.

With all this actual conspiracy going on, it doesn’t seem that much of a jump to go from what we already know or suspect about Epstein’s dealings and who it may have involved to murder. After all, jails are dangerous places where inmates do sometimes get murdered, even high-profile inmates. Not to mention that many of Epstein’s conspirators have already attempted and succeeded (at least for awhile) at coverup campaigns to hide Epstein’s crimes. Could these same conspirators have ordered Epstein’s death and now be covering it up by claiming it’s suicide? It’s certainly not impossible.

Over at the New York Times, they are reporting that Epstein had been taken off of suicide watch. He was supposed to be sharing a cell with an inmate, but the inmate that had been housed with him had been transferred out. Additionally, Epstein was supposed to be checked on every 30 minutes, but the corrections officers that were working the night of his death were not checking in on him as they were supposed to. This all could point to a conspiracy if you are looking for one. Why was Epstein taken off suicide watch? Why was his cell-mate transferred? Why did the guards not check on him? Could someone have ordered all these things in order to either create conditions for Epstein to die by suicide or perhaps even to set up a situation where an assassin could have murdered him? As I said earlier, it’s not impossible.

But, it is unlikely. The truth is that the Metropolitan Correction Center where Epstein was being held, like other federal jails, has suffered from decades of budget shortfalls and understaffing. The night that Epstein died, the two corrections officers that were on staff were both working overtime hours, and for one of the officers, it was his fifth night in a row working overtime. In terms of conditions at the jail, Slate writes that “in the Special Housing Unit where Epstein was held, the fluorescent lights are kept on 23 or 24 hours a day, prisoners are prohibited from calling out to each other, and the cell windows are frosted to prevent any glimpse of the outside world,” conditions that can often lead to mental illness and suicidal tendencies. They also point out that even though mental illness and suicide is extremely common in jails, at MCC there was only one psychiatrist on staff for both MCC and another local jail, a population of 2000 prisoners.

In a way, I think I want to believe Epstein was murdered because it’s a tidy end to the story of Epstein. It’s easy to believe that Epstein, by dealing with experts at crimes and coverups, ended up as the victim of one of those crimes and coverups. I want to believe it was murder, but the truth is much scarier.

The truth is that the MCC already had a reputation as an extremely dangerous place that was often mismanaged, creating situations that put their inmates at risk. Slate writes this about the MCC

We know that MCC, the federal prison in Manhattan that also recently housed Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, was deemed “worse than Guantanamo” by someone who spent time in both facilities. We know that cells are infested with bugs and rats so big they’re “more like roommates” and that the temperature swings from unbearable heat to frigid cold. We know that inmates have not received adequate medical care, that a corrections officers was found guilty of raping an inmate, and that officials allegedly tried to cover up the fatal beating of another prisoner.
It seems likely that Epstein was taken off suicide watch early because suicide watch is expensive and they need to conserve their budget. It seems likely that the inmate who was staying with Epstein was transferred out because he needed to be moved and the jail didn’t have the resources or manpower to quickly find a replacement cellmate. It seems likely that the corrections officers who were working the night of Epstein’s death were not checking on him every 30 minutes because they were overworked and tired and likely had many other inmates to check-in on every 30 minutes, along with a lot of other work to do, so doing those bi-hourly checks just fell by the wayside.

We don’t need a vast conspiracy among powerful people to explain why Epstein died. We already have the information we need to know what happened, but we don’t want to face it because it means we might have to do something about it. Epstein likely died due to suicide in a jail that didn’t have the budget or wherewithal to be able to fully protect him and provide him with mental health resources when he showed suicidal tendencies. He died because federal jails in the US are terrifying hell-holes with conditions that exacerbate mental illness then do not provide inmates the medical care they need to manage their conditions. It’s not a conspiracy so much as a total lack of regard from politicians and the taxpaying public who vote for them.

Epstein is never going to be held accountable for his crimes. His victims will never be able to face him in court. If you care about that, the answer is not to speculate about the latest conspiracies but pick up the phone and call your representatives and ask them for the funding to change the conditions for inmates in federal jails.

Post

“…For most of their history, humans had big, thick toe bones.

The available evidence appears to support this. As a matter of fact, prior to the advent of shoes, human toe bones were so large that only three could fit on the foot of adult males, and in females, the five toes had been reduced to a large, fused, uni-toe-like structure.

It is interesting to note that the necktie and the Windsor knot were developed prior to footwear.

As were the end table, lamp, and sofa which gave them a clear adaptive advantage over the Neanderthals by providing better light and additional seating at dinner parties.

Well, yeah, Monsanto is Monsanto. I wouldn’t be surprised if they used underhanded tactics to discredit Gilliam’s book. That fusion center stuff is ridiculous though. The internal emails just show that Monsanto decided to ignore Gilliam and Paul Thacker.

https://baumhedlundlaw.com/pdf/monsanto-documents-2/MONGLY12158226.pdf

On the other hand, Gilliam isn’t a journalist. She’s an anti-GMO activist employed by US Right to Know. Their biggest contributor is the Organic Consumers Association, which, along with funding anti-GMO activities, also promotes anti-vaxx propaganda. They and Dr Andrew Wakefield were responsible for the largest measles outbreak in Minnesota in 30 years in 2017. They targeted the Somalia-American community there because they were the most vulnerable to anti-vaxx propaganda.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/10/26/16552864/minnesoatas-measles-outbreak-immigrants-anti-vaxxers

The EPA is about to say that California can’t issue carcinogenic warning labels for Roundup under Prop 65. California’s own regulatory committee reviewed the research and found it to be non-carcinogenic, but was trying to label it based on the IARC report. Four scientists on the IARC panel have gotten rich in lawsuits against Bayer/Monsanto. So, like Monsanto, when faced with bad news, the Organic industry/USRTK is flooding the internet with negative PR about their enemy, such as the interview above. I’m not saying Monsanto didn’t do what Gilliam says they did, but the Organic Industry uses the same tactics. They secretly pay academics to say what they want them to say, just like they accuse Monsanto of doing. USRTK paid someone $134000 in 2018 but Ruskin refuses to disclose who it was. They accuse scientists working in biotech of being shills, smear their reputations, dox them, etc. etc.

How does this happen? He was on suicide watch.

I’m not going to rush to invoke a conspiracy, but that’s some high level indifference and/or incompetence by the correctional facility.

Zooey wrote:

nittany ram wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I think there has been decay in social etiquette, if that’s what you’re talking about. People no longer stand when guests enter a room, or remove their hats indoors. There is less…respect…for time and place. People are more brusque and salty generally.

Is that decay or just a change in what is considered normal social behavior? What is lost by not removing a hat indoors or not standing when someone enters a room?

I anticipated that argument, and thought carefully before I made my statement.

It is certainly true that there is nothing empirically “well-behaved” about removing one’s hat indoors, or…you know…making a better wardrobe effort than shorts, t-shirt, and flip flops when going to an upscale restaurant, or a Broadway show. Those are arbitrary markers of Respect, or Class, or Etiquette, or whatever, and have no merit in and of themselves.

I think, however, that those Pointless Conventions demonstrate an awareness of others, and a deference of Ego.

I mean…I think that unless you can show me that the Deference and Respect have been simply altered and assumed shape in some other sphere or behavior, I’m gonna stick with that. I think it reflects a trend towards selfishness, basically. We are now saying, as a culture, “I’m gonna be comfortable doing what I’m doing, and not stop to acknowledge our Common Space as worth respecting. You matter less than this arbitrary convention, and the fact is that I’m comfortable in this chair doing what I’m doing, and I don’t want to interrupt that just because you waltzed into the room. Etc.”

Yeah, I dunno. There was a time when people dressed up when they went anywhere. Is that out of respect for where they where going or more about trying to meet a social standard for appropriate attire. Maybe it wasn’t so much about respect for the venue but more about not wanting to be embarrassed. Perhaps it’s as simple as what is deemed appropriate attire has shifted since then, as it has throughout history.

My wife and I spent a day in NYC a couple weeks ago. We saw the 2pm matinee of “Phantom of the Opera” and an 8pm showing of “Hamilton” on Broadway. People were dressed very casually – shorts, t-shirts, and not just at the matinee – at the 8pm showing as well. To me, it didn’t seem like it was due to a lack of respect, but because it was 90 fricken degrees outside.

wv wrote:

I agreed with them. Cept, I understand ‘why’ American are ‘stupid’ and ‘dont care’.

Corporate-Capitalism made them stupid and selfish.

w
v

I’m probably over-generalizing here but I think Europeans are more community-centered than Americans. Americans tend towards individualism.

Europeans travel a lot more than Americans. Visiting other countries gives you a whole new perspective on things. It promotes thinking globally. It helps you care about how stuff impacts other people.

Will Jared Goff’s performance as ‘young Bill’ in the upcoming film, “Bill and Ted 3” outshine his performance on the field?

zn wrote:

The question though is whether the show itself stuck to the “animal” thing or violated it and suddenly had the dragon acting on the basis of some kind of reasoning. After all it’s magic…maybe it’s capable of resenting the thing that in the end destroyed Dany. It’s even there in the room or what’s left of the room in the first place because it sensed something was wrong.

Oh sure, if you want to create some sort of fantasy world where dragons are capable of high order reasoning…

zn wrote:

One thing that didn’t come up in discussion…the dragon not torching Jon Snow for killing Daenerys. Well maybe part of it is that Jon’s a Targaryen, and the dragon can sense that. He won’t torch family. Another thing is, it’s a very unexpected and interesting move that it torched the throne. Now one part of me said, that’s a little schlockey, and are we to believe dragons can reason like that? But most of me went, interesting. The dragon in its grief and rage destroys the thing it believes really killed Dany. Throughout the series dragon fire was used to destroy Dany’s enemies, and the dragon basically went, well here’s your real enemy right here (desire for power). I found I was actually touched and moved by that and saw it as a very appropriate, resonant, and effective twist. I liked that moment.

I really liked that entire scene. It was visually very beautiful, and moving. I knew either Jon or Dani was going to kill the other during their embrace. Jon went there with the purpose to kill her, but I thought Dani might kill the rightful heir to the throne first.

Since Jon was a Targaryen, could dragon fire even kill him? Can he withstand fire like Dani? Even so, the dragon still could have rendered him limb from limb, so I agree that Drogon spared Jon because of who he is. I don’t know if Drogo’s destroying of the throne was intentional or if it was simply directing its grief and anger away from Jon and the throne happened to be in the way. Although intelligent, the dragon is still essentially an animal. I’m not sure that it would understand what the throne represented. But obviously the melting of the throne was symbolic.

Nothing particularly unexpected happened. Acting was solid and it wrapped the series up nicely.

Now looking forward to ‘The Long Night’…the GOT prequel premiering on HBO sometime in 2020. Btw, the name of the series hasn’t been decided for sure but GRR Martin wants ‘The Long Night’ so…