Jump to content

PTINS

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    701
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2284 Surly 10%

About PTINS

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. FIFY. We need to reduce consumption. There is not a source of fresh water source that can meet the demand. Aquifers are viewed as fresh water oceans; they not. They are static filtration systems with long term, multi year cycle rate. If you shorten the cycle, the water you put in is the same water you take out; unfiltered water. Once we have abundant, cheap energy ..., wake up, you're late for work. It costs what it costs, impacted by inefficiencies in politics, and physics. One is easier to fix than the other. There is a fundamental reason the south was sparsely populated til the 60's, AIR CONDITIONING. A/C follows air and water to sustain life. People tend to settle in places with running water. There is not enough running water between Dallas - Austin-San Antonio to "support" the current demand. Water for drinking is an absolute. Water for recreation and irrigation, and industrial consumption is not. It should be priced accordingly.
  2. The Kazan Aircraft Production Plant in Gorbunov, Tatarstan is 600+ miles/1,000 kilometers from Ukraine held territory.
  3. I did a quick wiki search for my comments. I know we get the remnants from East Texas, Northern Mexico and Pacific Coast storms. I don't wish misery or harm on anyone, but I like the Thunder in my Creek.
  4. I bought Thunder Creek Ranch in 2002, NW of Utopia and west of Medina. A series of tropical storms had dumped ~ 17" of rain over a few weeks that summer and it looked like a tropical paradise. Thunder Creek was the appropriate name for the area, then. I've learned It usually takes a hurricane/tropical storm weather event for Thunder Creek to Thunder, and sadly, those seem to be fewer occasions than when I roamed the 40 acres. Muck like the levels of Lake Medina. Texas has been "hit" by 46 hurricanes/tropical storms since 2000, but only 5 have made landfall between Corpus Christi and Brownsville; Generally, anything east and west of that corridor doesn't impact central Texas, including Utopia and Austin. August 9, 2002 – Tropical Storm Bertha makes landfall as a tropical depression near Kingsville, August 16, 2007 – Tropical Storm Erin makes landfall near Lamar July 23, 2008 – Hurricane Dolly makes landfall at South Padre Island September 8, 2016 – The remnants of Hurricane Newton bring heavy rains to parts of western Texas Late August 2017 – Hurricane Harvey makes landfall on San José Island near Rockport The occasional rain shower keeps things green, but it takes a series of wet years to keep the springs recharged, and the surface water is dependent on consistent localized rainfall, or a named storm. There is no "normal" weather pattern, just the length of time between the transitions of flooding and drought. It is amazing how different the weather is in the country v. Austin, ~ 113 miles as the crow flies. Big difference between the radiant heat sink generated by all the concrete, asphalt, cars and the millions of 98 degree meat popsicles around town and the open country with zero impervious cover. The people are different too. Nobody complains about the water levels while they are sitting in their swimming pools watching the sprinklers watering the grass.
  5. Now that I finished my "No Nukes" No CR rant... The Netflix Series, "Turning Point: The Bomb and the Cold War", is worth watching. Heavy CR slant to the dialogue, but the "factual"nuggets were very informative. The last few episodes are very topical. Simply labeling Putin as a KGB honk is misleading; His early years with a front row seat to the Berlin Wall coming down and the unraveling of the Soviet Union was much more impactful. His long term ties to the St. Petersburg mafia and the oligarchs provides a much better understanding of who and what he is and of the recent history with Ukraine. One thing doesn't change. Putin is pure evil and must be stopped.
  6. You sir, fucked up the most informative thread on this board. Please take your high school debate back and forth opinions and keep them to yourself, and off of this board. Thanks. Ukraine is fighting the same fight that my father, and you, and many before and after him fought, at a cost of maybe 2 cents on the dollar, without putting any American lives at risk. However, they are not fighting for the same things we fought for, they are fighting to simply exist. Thanks. Putin is the worst of humanity, on steroids, with ill gotten wealth that would make the titans of capitalism blush, and nukes. If it doesn't end here, it doesn't end. Thanks. This used to be the first thread I read every morning. The last few days have been brutal, and disappointing. Thanks. War is political. End of story. The self policing and keeping this thread on topic and void of CR has been admirable, until the past few days and weeks. Please don't fuck it up. Thanks. We all have questions. Perhaps some questions are better for Google, before they get asked here. I ask them here because I appreciate that so many of you have forgotten more about more things than most will ever know. I like this place because it usually provides the answers before the questions are even asked. You know who you are. Thank you. Slava Ukraini
  7. Hard to find any good news from Ukraine, so I'll settle for bad news from Russia. The flooding in Russia is not because of a "dam failure", but appears to be from the volumes of water flowing through the creeks and rivers and over the dikes, dams, and whatever else is in the way. Reports of water at ~ 10 meter levels (32 feet) proximate to 16 foot levees means there is 16 feet of water flowing over the top. The widespread flooding spans an area and different river systems from Sorochinsk to Kurgan, ~ 540 miles. The pitiful response from the state will not improve, as there does not appear to be any significant resources available, and the flooding situation will get worse before it gets better. The flooding in Orsk, just north of Kazakhstan, is not coming from the Ural River that traverses east to west, but from the Yelshanka River, directionally northwest of the city. In the second video below, at the 09 second mark, you can see the monument in Gagarin Square, with the flood water coming towards the front of the monument, which faces Northwest. It is shown in the Google Earth screen shot. In the screenshot below, everything (~ 25 square miles) between the 638' elevations north and south of the Ural River, including the Gagarin Monument, is probably under water. The residential area doesn't have high rises, just a shit load of high density single family dwellings. (The lots are ~ 30 ft x 100 ft). The numbers of flooded homes, ~ 10,000?, in Orsk alone, is going to cause a shit storm, literally (Ha! Ha!), that won't go away. There's not a FEMA bailout on the horizon. One official proposed ~ $108/month for 6 months as compensation. Another said "he should be on vacation, not here." If your home is trashed and you have no place to go, how much do you care about going to work? Or going to Ukraine to be a meat popsicle? Worker productivity at the industrial facilities is going to be impacted, but to what degree? In a few days or weeks, this won't just be a few people in front of city hall complaining. I'm hoping this energizes and mobilizes the masses like never before err ..., nothing since 1917. Too bad it's in the middle of bum fuck no where. Corruption, meet Karma. One can only hope.
  8. I did not get tickets and had 51 points.
  9. “just throwing it and hoping for the best.” This year, the last 3 quarters v. OU and 1st half against Hou, QE completion rate was 90+ %. There are numerous throws he made as the receiver was coming out their break, where he anticipated where the receiver would be and delivered a perfect throw in stride. Can he improve? Certainly. But there was nothing close to Mike “find the ball and go up and get it” Evans on the Texas roster the last 2 years. Fuck that hoping the best bs. His anticipating and missing has as much to do with the receivers be off schedule as much as it has to do with the throws. Maybe he could wait another 2/10ths of a second before throwing it. Maybe is doesn’t want to chance a 250 lb meat head driving him into the ground because of a weather vane whiff by the OL. QE throws as catchable ball as well as anyone QB I’ve ever seen.
  10. INTERVIEW ANTONY J. BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE CHIEF OF MISSION RESIDENCE PARIS, FRANCE APRIL 2, 2024 Secretary Antony J. Blinken With Darius Rochebin of LCI/TF1 QUESTION: Good evening, Mr. Secretary of State. Antony Blinken, you’re head of U.S. foreign policy. First, Ukraine’s cry for help. Is the United States in a position to promise that the Ukrainian state, that Kyiv, will never fall into Russian hands? SECRETARY BLINKEN: I am convinced we already have. In other words, it is not happening, it’s never going to happen. At the beginning of the Russian aggression in 2022, we thought there was a possibility that Kyiv would fall. But thanks to the incredible resistance of the Ukrainian people, and thanks also to the support given to Ukraine by the United States, France and other countries, Putin’s desire to conquer the whole country, to wipe it off the map, to make it part of a greater Russia, has not materialized and it won’t. QUESTION: Mr. Zelenskyy said: “We’re not 100% sure that Putin won’t use nuclear weapons.” And he added, “That’s what makes President Biden cautious.” Do you, indeed, have to take that risk into account? SECRETARY BLINKEN: From the start, from day one, President Biden was convinced of two things: that we had to do everything possible to support Ukraine, because the aggression against Ukraine was not just an aggression against the Ukrainian people and against the country, but against all the basic principles of the international system. But he was also convinced that we had to avoid a war with Russia. QUESTION: A nuclear escalation? SECRETARY BLINKEN: An escalation, whether conventional or nuclear. And so, since then, he’s been leading with great clarity in this direction: supporting Ukraine but avoiding a war with Russia. QUESTION: It’s not just theoretical. Don’t we remember the warning that went out about a possible use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine? If that were to happen, would the United States respond? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Look, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals. There was indeed a moment when there was fear. I think that — QUESTION: (Inaudible) there were concrete messages to that effect. SECRETARY BLINKEN: All I can say is that there was a fear that it was possible. But I think the Russians heard not only from the United States, not only from France, but from many other countries, including China, that a nuclear weapon should absolutely not be used. QUESTION: But in principle, Mr. Secretary of State, compared to the use of conventional weapons, would the slightest nuclear use, even tactical weapons, be a complete change? SECRETARY BLINKEN: For us, it would be a complete change, yes. QUESTION: With consequences for Russia? SECRETARY BLINKEN: With consequences. But we’re doing everything, of course, to avoid this possibility and to avoid a war, a bigger war. But at the same time, we absolutely must support Ukraine, because the Russian aggression continues to this day, it continues to do appalling damage within Ukraine, and it continues to present a danger not only to Ukraine, but to Europe as well. QUESTION: The Balts are expressing their fear of a more conventional war. It would be a Russian incursion into the Baltic territories and, as in Crimea in 2014, a fait accompli. Would the United States militarily prevent it this time? SECRETARY BLINKEN: You know, we have an exceptional asset, which is NATO. And the basic idea of NATO is that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on everyone. QUESTION: Article 5. SECRETARY BLINKEN: Article 5. And I don’t think it’s in Mr. Putin’s interest to widen the conflict, especially with or against a NATO member. QUESTION: Mr. Blinken, do you understand that this is the crucial question – for the Balts, in particular? Can they be assured that even one foot of a Russian soldier on Baltic territory would lead to a military response from the United States of America? SECRETARY BLINKEN: A millimeter or a centimeter. For us, Article 5 is essential. QUESTION: With a military reaction? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Again, I won’t go into specific hypotheses, but I think that any adversary who is aggressive against a NATO member knows that he will get a response from NATO, including the United States. QUESTION: That’s you. If it’s Mr. Trump, does that change? SECRETARY BLINKEN: You know, all I can do is manage today and do the best I can with all my colleagues. The future — QUESTION: But do you understand, excuse me, Mr. Secretary of State, the fear of Europeans who wonder, ‟If Mr. Trump is there, there may be a disengagement from NATO?” SECRETARY BLINKEN: I hear fears coming from my colleagues, from my fellow citizens, but, you know, there are often fears when there are changes in democracies, whether it’s the United States, whether it’s France, whether it’s any democratic country where there’s a change of government every four years, every six years or whatever, there’s always something, because of course you get used to what you’ve got. You don’t know what’s coming next, but what I can tell you is that this year will mark 75 years of NATO, 75 years of American administrations, Republicans and Democrats, supporting NATO. I’m convinced that it will continue, no matter what. QUESTION: You have helped Ukraine powerfully. You rule out – that’s clear – American troops in Ukraine, don’t you? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Yes. QUESTION: However, what happens if the French – Mr. Macron has said, “it’s not out of the question” – the Finns, the Poles go for it. It’s their choice. Will it require a NATO consensus? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Again, I stay away from making hypotheses for the future. Our policy is clear. President Biden’s policy is clear. There will be no American troops on Ukrainian soil. QUESTION: Why not? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Because for us, it’s something that will lead closer to a direct conflict with Russia, which we want to avoid. It’s not in our interest and it’s not in the interest of the Allies. But at the same time — QUESTION: Excuse me. SECRETARY BLINKEN: Go ahead. QUESTION: Would it be like a stab in the pact since, let’s say, the Cold War when there’s been no direct confrontation between the two nuclear powers, for ground troops to take place? SECRETARY BLINKEN: For us, it’s a matter of national interest. It’s not in our interest to have a direct conflict with Russia. I don’t think it’s in the interest of any of the NATO members. But at the same time, there is a determination, a conviction that we must do our utmost to support Ukraine, and do so not only this year, but in the years to come. Because the real danger – there is an immediate danger on the ground – but the greatest danger is the idea that may be in Putin’s head, that he can outlast us, that we’ll end up fading away, whether it’s us, Europe or the other partners. I think it’s essential to convince Putin that this won’t be the case. QUESTION: But, Antony Blinken, once again, if the French also go, the Finns, the Poles, etc., is it at our peril or do you think it will involve NATO? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Everyone must make decisions on a national level and on an Alliance level too. QUESTION: Will the Alliance have to come to an agreement? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Again, I won’t go into hypotheticals, but I know very well that, with the relations we have within the Alliance, the relations we have directly with France, everything we do, we do together. We talk about it, we discuss it, and we decide together. QUESTION: In Brazil, President Macron raised the possibility of Vladimir Putin taking part in the next G20 meeting, provided, he said, that it would be useful and that there was a consensus among all G20 members. Do you see this as a possibility, under these conditions? SECRETARY BLINKEN: If there’s a consensus among all the members and if it’s useful, yes. In the current situation, it’s hard to see how it could be useful and how there could be a consensus among all the members — QUESTION: For you, would a Putin-Biden handshake be conceivable, provided, of course, that it was useful? SECRETARY BLINKEN: The idea has never been to exclude Russia or Mr. Putin. It’s the actions, it’s the policy of Russia and of Mr. Putin that triggers what happens in terms of Russia’s relations with the G20 or with the G7, with the world. So, if policy changes, we don’t rule anything out. The problem is that we don’t have any proof, for the moment, that policy is changing. QUESTION: But if the policy changes, can we talk to Mr. Putin again very directly, even at a summit? SECRETARY BLINKEN: I hope there will be a day, and I hope that day will come sooner rather than later, when relations between our countries and Russia will be quite different from the current one. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, and it’s not the case because of Mr. Putin’s policies. QUESTION: So, to be perfectly clear, he’s not a pariah forever? Not necessarily? SECRETARY BLINKEN: Russia is not a pariah, and for us, it’s not so much the individuals, the personalities, that count, it’s the policy pursued by a country.
  11. We walked across on the bridge in February. I weighed 150 lbs dripping wet, wearing a ski parka that caught a lot of wind. Self preservation is strong with me. Too much good terra firma around not to have it under my feet.
  12. I did an Expert Witness Report regarding business interruption insurance on an offshore drilling rig. They claimed damages for a well that was never drilled. Should have been a slam dunk. The attorneys said the insurance "people" would never show up to testify. They "earned" ~ $350,000 for the commissions (2005) on the policies and would never do anything to jeopardize their livelihood. The Gateway Arch in St. Louis can move as much as 18". The slight movements at the top give the appearance of a much larger movement at the bottom, 600 ft below. Looking straight down, you could see the sidewalk underneath the Arch, and then it would disappear, and then it would reappear. And then we were done, and left. The egg shaped tram that toggles back and forth on the way to the top of the Arch is not for the faint of heart. It took a few days to clear all the reservations at the Holiday Inn.
  13. I remember picking up my Norwegian au pair at the airport, saw this statuesque blond goddess walking towards us, holy fuck!!! She was walking next to my au pair. A few months later, was with my friend at a beer & pizza joint in Boulder, and in walked a pack of 10-12 au pairs, from Norway, Sweden, Germany & Spain. Got home at 5 in the morning. Wife was sitting at the table drinking coffee. "Where the hell have you been!!!" "With Laila and her friends?" "Doing what?"
  14. "Galloping Gertie" We were at the top of Pikes Peak, well above the tree line, and it started snowing, and then thundering, and then lightning, adios!!!. On the way down, the snow turned to sleet and an icy, slushy mix was covering the road. Nobody said a word on the way down. White knuckle city! In HS, I drove my friends Chevelle down the hill on 2222, ~ 150+ MPH, used 3 of the 4 lanes to make the turn at the bottom. Item #34 of stupid shit I did and why I'm lucky to be here. Moore's Crossing over Onion Creek, Elroy, Texas (Richard Moya Park) Built in In 1915, 3 of the 6 spans from the 1884 iron Congress Avenue Bridge were used to construct the bridge. It had a wooden deck, and squeaked when you drove across it; sounded like it was falling apart.
×
×
  • Create New...