Some Social Networking sites, put cursor over image for site name...

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

I laugh out loud about how WRONG you two are on just about every political and legal and scientific issue

Well done, you pander to a know-nothing audience that doesn't understand any of the following:

Human Caused Climate chaos is real and you simply contribute to ensuring nothing will be done about it.  

WWW.VHEMT.ORG is a site you ought to visit, since it represents the ONLY moral choice.  We've already booted the pooch and will be causing our own extinction in the very near future...

The constitution of the US supersedes any AZ law, and you should support the legal battle against it, since if the legal battle fails, the law will stand, but at least it would be settled law.  You guys continue to project an ignorance of how the legal system works in this country, but I know that's just shtick.

The whole "heads on a stick" tax "revolt" is insanity to the max, since most Californians have seen their taxes go down thanks to Obama, and the ones who ought NOT to have their taxes go down, the very rich, are your beneficiaries.

Here's just one little factoid you probably know full well but wouldn't care to share with your audience...

1.  When the rich get a tax break, supposedly, they then have more to invest in new businesses.

2.  However, the rich didn't get that way by being stupid or by gambling.

3.  The wealthy know more than most that the odds of a new business actually succeeding is astonishingly long odds.

4.  So, they invest most of their tax savings in safe wealth maintaining investment, and perhaps risk 10% of it.  THE WHOLE IDEA OF A DEFICIT AND DEBT IS GREAT FOR THE RICH, SINCE THE GOVERNMENT WILL BACK THEIR PURCHASE OF T-BILLS AND NOTES, ZERO RISK FOR A GUARANTEED RETURN...THAT'S THE LEGACY OF Ron the Alzheimer Reagan's Presidency, he who should be anything but lionized...

5.  the TRUTH? - The rich benefit the most from government SPENDING, since the police protect them, the roads carry their trucks to market, the rule of law makes this a low risk place to do business, and therefore they ought to pay far more than they currently do, (I know the top 5% pay 80% of taxes already, so what?  They ought to pay 90% or more, since they benefit the very most!)

Meanwhile, their tax gift from Bush continues to swell the deficit.

Did you know that for every dollar of unemployment spent, the economy sees over one dollar of benefit...

Guess you won't share that nugget with your audience.

Thanks for the entertainment.

Trade Show Guru

Web References to Morton C. Frishberg (with various spellings etc.)

As the Internet accumulates more and more data, I recently performed a fairly intense search for references to my father, Morton Charles Frishberg (Mort Frishberg, M.C. Frishberg, M. C. Frishberg, Morton Frishberg, etc.)

The following are what I've found so far...enjoy!

http://www.templeofaaron.org/about_history.html

In 1938 another "first" occurred, when Cantor Maurice Goldberg introduced the practice of having boys ofBar Mitzvah age officiate as Cantor at Shaharit services on Saturday mornings, adding public service to the Bar Mitzvah boy's reading of the Torah. Under Cantor Goldberg, the first boy to participate as cantor at Shaharit services on the Saturday of his Bar Mitzvah was Morton Frishberg. Two years later, in 1940, young boys were beginning to conduct the Musaf service on Saturday. Cantor Goldberg soon organized a mixed voice choir, too.

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=366271 as a footnote to a 1961 article in the Association of Computer Machinery...(See Below)

http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu/specialcollections/coll/pauling/calendar/1958/06/index.html

Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Morton C. Frishberg to LP RE: Would like any information about the "non-oxygenating" molecule and the drug treatment since they have a mentally retarded child. [Letter from LP to Frishberg June 4, 1958] [Filed under LP Science: Orthomolecular Medicine and Mental Health: Materials re: Ford Foundation grants for the study of mental disorders, 1955-1966: Box #11.089, Folder #89.8]

https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/8803/1/32010036.pdf  (See Below)

(See footnotes on page 38 if you can still see this one...)

http://web2.acbl.org/nabcbulletins/1997summer/db3.pdf - bridge tournament reference...

http://picasaweb.google.com/Bob.Luba/PLATO#

Use "Find" on that page (control F then type Frishberg for the surprising result!) 

http://www.pitt.edu/~atteberr/jazz/articles/FRISHBER.html  David waxing poetic re: Mort's piano tutoring...

There may be more...the two articles cited below were referenced more than once had to do with "pert" charting, as Mort was an early practitioner of this means to ensure a project is on track for completion on time and budget...

1.  M. C. FRISHBERG, "Least Cost Estimating and Scheduling --Scheduling Phase Only," IBM 650 Program Library File No. 10.3.005.

2.   M. C. Frishberg, "LESS Tells You how Project is Doing", Hydrocarbon Processing and Petroleum Refiner, Vol. 41, no. 2 (February 1962), pp. 130-138.

Google Search Results, read from bottom up...oh what a difference a month makes...

1. Lloyd's syndicates launch legal action over BP insurance claim ...

   May 26, 2010 ... BP's attempts to limit the financial damage from the catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico suffered a blow yesterday when almost half ...
   business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry.../article7136623.ece

3. London: BP, Lloyds, Imperial Tobacco - market update

   Apr 27, 2010 ... Lloyds Banking Group estimated 2010 net income. BP Plc first quarter revenues surged 55% and net more than doubled. ...
   www.ticker.com/?page=market_update&story...BP,-Lloyds... - Cached

--
Frish

Tropical Storm naming convention, 2010

As the hurricane season 2010 begins, this year's names have been assigned...

ARCO, BP, Chevron, Dubai, Exxon, ....

--
Frish

Wurst Weekend Ever

Frish ponders: How much water has already been polluted?

I am just speculating.  And I'm sending this to various number oriented correspondents and lists, so please shoot me a note if I've blown the analysis somewhere...

Otherwise, share it as you desire!

No one really knows, as of 06/07/2010, how much oil has come up in the Gulf.

Some say as much as the Exxon Valdez 11,000,000 gallons of oil already has been surpassed.  

Today, 06/08/2010, I heard 23 to 50 million gallons of oil. Hence the following...

Several weeks ago I concluded that BP ought to be charged a per cubic mile of ocean polluted fee.  Something along the lines of $200Bn per cubic mile fine, (and the responsibility of mitigation of damage etc.) might help pay back the cost to the United States over the next 25 years or so.)

So, how much water does that much oil pollute?

How much oil can life tolerate in its water?

Last night I tried the following formula.

How many parts per million (ppm) oil in water is pollution?

10 parts per million sounded like plenty to me.  

11,000,000 gallons of oil will pollute 1,000,000,000,000 gallons of water at this concentration.

One cubic mile of water is 1,101,117,150,000 gallons of water.

However, I just heard 1 part in a billion affected the viability of fish eggs in Price William Sound (ExValdez).  

Now, 11,000,000 gallons will pollute 11,000,000,000,000,000 gallons of water.

Basically, 11,000 Cubic miles per Valdez spill size problem

But, why stop there, since it could be 53,000,000 gallons spilt already.

53,000 cubic miles of polluted sea water.

Earth's approximate total water supply is 1,360,000,000 km³ (326,000,000 mi³).

That is, three hundred twenty six million cubic miles.  Plenty left to pollute even after this spill.

However, it clumps, and it floats, so the part of the ocean most productive is the most polluted.  

Consider, one cube of water, a mile each side...(5280 feet) 

Slice it on any face every 10 feet to make panels 1Mile x 1mile x 10ft. (528 panels)

Then slice in another direction every 10 feet to make strips, 10ft x 10ft x 1mile (52.8 slices)

Then, put the ends together...and see how many strips of oil cover how much ocean.

528 x 52.8 = 27,878 "strands" of polluted water, 10 ft. x 10 ft x 1 mile long.

The 27,878 strands of polluted water is for EACH cubic mile polluted.

If I took 1ppb as the basis for pollution, instead of 10ppm, I need to increase the number of cubic miles from 1 per 11Mgals to 10,000 cubic miles per 11Mgals of oil...(or maybe 100 cubic miles, I need some help!)

And now, we're talking some real pollution...

Okay, so tell me if I missed something, that's a huge amount to have polluted...

Consider as the oil spreads, didn't they used to control mosquitoes by putting oil on standing water?

How does oxygen flow into the water change based on oil content of surface etc.

Or, consider 10 feet of polluted water over 528 square Miles Ocean/shoreline for EACH cubic mile (11 (or 23 or 50,000) so far and counting!) etc.

Any of you math whizzes are more than welcome to tell me how wrong I've got it...

Movie Parking Warning Beverly Hills Jun 01, 2010

Filming.

May the Sun Shine BRIGHT

http://www.the-brights.net/vision/backtalk.html#8

A new word struggles to become accepted...

You can't convert an adjective into a noun!

English is fine the way it is?  Sorry, but we feel there is a clear need for a noun that "umbrellas" (note the verb usage?) over the naturalistic worldview folks. The term just had to be something easy to pronounce. It was desirable that it be "in tune" with the Enlightenment heritage and scientific values.  To us, this term just plain ol' fits the bill.   

Perhaps the noun Bright won't make it.  We can certainly try, though, to introduce a term that we feel has important uses, not only for the Brights, but for society at large.

Language has always changed and will continue to change.  We would like to see Bright as a commonly accepted affirmative noun with which to refer to persons whose worldview is naturalistic. There's no such word for that concept right now.  We hope in twenty years, there will be.

--
Cheers,

Frish