Rebane's Ruminations
February 2015
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

[This is the addended transcript of my regular KVMR commentary aired on 18 February 2015.]

It’s again hard to know where to start.  At the federal level the administration is tying itself in knots as report after report comes in of Islamic terrorists operating on multiple continents while becoming more united and coordinated.   Our leadership has no idea from what it is supposed to protect America and its allies.  Three European capitals suffer attacks from indigenous Muslims, and now ISIS operates freely on the shores of Tripoli, and demonstrates its reach with a video of its mass execution of 21 Egyptians for the capital crime of being Christians.

Everyone from the Danish prime minister to the pope regales against the jihadi organizations that are united in the global goal of Islamic supremacy.  Yes, even liberal commentators have started to identify the similarity between Nazi Germany’s goal of imposing racial supremacy to the Islamists’ goal of religious supremacy.  And in the White House we are going through contortions wordsmithing daily pronouncements that describe events without ever mentioning their Muslim perpetrators and Christian or Jewish victims.  According to our leaders we are at war with a tactic called terror that is being randomly practiced by unidentified criminal elements.  All the while the world laughs at us and then sadly shakes its head.  January 2017 cannot come quickly enough.


Before we leave Washington, let’s revisit the latest charge that it is the Republicans who will again shut down government, or is it only the Department of Homeland Security, thereby “leaving us defenseless” against those random acts of terror.  Actually it is neither, and the media’s automatic blaming of Republicans is more than just another dollop of yellow journalism.  The DHS funding issue involves only the president’s unlawful executive order giving amnesty to millions of illegal aliens living in our midst.  It does nothing to impede the security services of that agency.

But we hear only Republicans questioned about whether and why they are the ones who will “shut down government”.  The funding bill is stuck in the Senate because the Democrats are filibustering it, yet no one asks Minority Leader Harry Reid why he and his caucus are prepared to shut down government.  Why are the Democrats not willing to let the bill come to a floor vote, and then be passed to the president for his signature or veto?  How come that little light never comes on for any of our crack journalists?

BTW, the informed listener knows that not even DHS will be shut down since the overwhelming fraction of its employees will perform “essential services” that are not affected by such budgetary bickerings.

And coming back to California, we are experiencing what the whole country – at least those who pay attention – know as a government induced or amplified drought.  The drought itself is real, but its economic impact is made surreal by the State Water Resources Control Board, an arm of California’s Environmental Protection Agency, the rabid little brother of the federal EPA.  That board has mandated the daily, yes daily, flushing of 4,000 acre feet of water into the Pacific Ocean.  That daily loss is enough to irrigate 1,000 acres and provide water for 4,000 families for an entire year (more here).

There is even bipartisan opposition to this insane policy that purports to put the hypothetical discomfort of fish ahead of the actual welfare of California’s workers and citizens.  The national press reports that “Senator Dianne Feinstein , Democratic Rep. Jim Costa and five House Republicans this week importuned the five-member State Water Resources Control Board to overrule their executive director” Tom Howard.  But “Citing a “potential additional risk of entrainment” of fish, Mr. Howard rejected the request to pump more water south” instead of into the ocean.

And these are just recent examples that come to mind.  Meanwhile government continues to grow and spend.  And no one seems to recall that the bigger the government, the more inequity there is in the wages and wealth of its people.  So when does ignorance become evil?  The eternal answer to that has always been ‘ignorance become evil, when the ignorant become powerful’.

My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on georgerebane.com where the addended transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively.  However my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

[Addendum]  Does everyone understand why Obama’s ‘Immigration Order’ was blocked?  The Left’s loud claims that it was “a political stunt by a George W Bush-appointed judge and would be quickly reversed” is not exactly on the mark.  The president claimed “prosecutorial discretion” as the basis for his ‘executive action’.  Prosecutorial discretion has been the accepted authority for executive officials to set priorities in the enforcement of existing law, and to specifically to refrain from such enforcement in cases where the public interest is least urgent.

However, Obama’s overreach is that his action expands the law, which is and has been for sixty years the Immigration and Naturalization Act.  Under his new amnesty program named Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), illegal aliens would be granted work authorization, become eligible for Social Security, and numerous other federal and state benefits.  Moreover, almost all non-felon illegals here since 2010 would qualify under DAPA.  In short, DAPA would greatly expand the existing Immigration and Naturalization Act and write new law, a function constitutionally reserved to the US Congress.

So anyone with minimum reading skills should understand that this act by President Obama is illegal and has nothing to do with prosecutorial discretion.  And the injunction handed down by US District Court Judge Andrew Hanen was to stop granting illegal aliens benefits not allowed under current law (more here).

Posted in , ,

64 responses to “Governments’ Wall-to-wall Insanity”

  1. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    “So anyone with minimum reading skills should understand that this act by President Obama is illegal and has nothing to do with prosecutorial discretion.”
    No George, it was all about prosecutorial discretion… it actually removed it entirely by declaring entire classes of persons would not be prosecuted at all.

    Like

  2. George Rebane Avatar

    Gregory 833pm – A cynical interpretation indeed, but there is nothing in the Constitution or in case law which says that prosecutorial discretion can be or has ever been implemented by the executive writing new law. That was the point of Judge Hanen’s ruling.

    Like

  3. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    The point of Judge Hansen ruling was Obama’s creation of affirmative benefits to millions of people. Work permits, eligibity for benefits, legal status, eligibity for a Social Security card, health care, etc. If it was merely the Obama Administraion refusing to deport anyone or an entire class of people, then that is not reviewable and is indeed Constitutional prosecutorial discretion.
    Think it was Arizona that sued the Federal Gov’t in the later 90’s on the issue of not deporting people and lost big time in the Supreme Court.
    The Court objected to creating affirmative benefits (a new law) as opposed to simply not enforcing the law. Maybe we are all saying the same thing, but prosecutorial discretion was not even an issue. Nor is it reviewable. The Judge said not deporting is different from giving a whole class of people affirmative benefits without legislation passed by Congress. Obama went too far beyond simple banning deportation for 3 years.

    Like

  4. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    You cannot take an illegal alien here and with an Executuve Order declare him/her legal. No, we are not talking about refugees or those whose country of orgin refuse to take them back, like China does.
    Most of the Dream Act has already been made into law by Congress. No problem with that. It’s the plan to extend legal status to parents of a child born here as well as illegal aliens living here since 2012 that the court disagreed with. Especially the directives from the new DHS boss. The judge left everything unsettled by saying the Administration made an administrative no-no. Time will tell.
    Don’t know when the Speaket of the House finally grew a pair, but he apparently has. Now is the perfect time for him to display his new found marbles and stand up tall to protect the separation of powers, despite the onslaught of brutal bad publicity.

    Like

  5. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    4,000 acre ft is a drip off the faucet when compared with the size of the SF Bay. Just how much water would you deem “reasonable?” 4,000 af is probably NOT going to be enough to stop salt intrusion up to Walnut Grove and possibly Sacramento itself.. Many more than 4,000 af of well water will be contaminated and crop land destroyed if fresh water isn’t allowed to flush the delta. Tens of thousands of jobs rely on flushing flows into the bay. The SF Oakland fishing fleets (and associated industries) would go belly up. Again, please tell us how much water would you deem reasonable to send out to sea?

    Like

  6. George Rebane Avatar

    joes 831am – I’m not sure you’re catching the import of this MARGINAL diversion of water into the ocean. On an annual basis this would support over 365,000 additional acres of agriculture, AND provide adequate water supply for 1,460,000 households (or various combinations thereof). Not insignificant numbers.

    Like

  7. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    I do admire your mathematical skills, but for once you are not looking at the whole equation. Salt water intrusion threatens 500,000 acres of delta farmlands. These acres produce about 5 times the value as similar acres in the Southern San Joaquin Valley (think cotton vs asparagus). Well over a million Bay Area households are served by the EBMUD pumping station at Freeport. Between Freeport and Sherman Island another 750,000 households are served via direct pumping of the Sacramento River or groundwater recharge from the river. A flushing flow of 4,000 acre feet of water is an investment in the heartland security of Northern California. Sending our water to Southern California would be a grave mistake.

    Like

  8. George Rebane Avatar

    joes 123pm – excellent response. Can you cite the study that has determined the impacts at Freeport and Sherman Island that would suffer were the 4K ac-ft export of water to be resumed.
    BTW, even though a lifelong former resident of soCal, I am no fan of reckless export of norCal water to that arid semi-desert. We always wondered when the northerners were going to get wise, and just cut back our water supply. Gotta admit though, soCal is beautiful when they can soak their lawns and other greenies in our water. Nevertheless, they do contribute a bit to the state’s GDP.

    Like

  9. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    I know you are a supported or a new state or States for Northern California. How in your view would that effect our water policy towards the South State?

    Like

  10. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 356pm – Not informed on current water agreements with the south, I would still expect that part of SoJ statehood would require honoring those agreements. But were those to sunset, the new ones would involve some serious pro quid quo for the water they would then buy. In reality, I would expect that in the time frame we are considering, there would be major advances in desalinization technology and possibly even fusion power that may make the whole water question moot.
    In the meanwhile, I still look at all the water in the Columbia River and think that Oregon could make a buck piping it California and Nevada.

    Like

  11. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    “BTW, even though a lifelong former resident of soCal, I am no fan of reckless export of norCal water to that arid semi-desert.”
    I’m also no fan of reckless export of western Sierra Nevada water to the city and county of ‘Frisco. That water could be better used in the Central Valley right now, which is where it would be had the Hetch Hetchy Dam not been built to take the water elsewhere.
    There’s not a chance in hell that Oregonians will ship water to California.

    Like

  12. George Rebane Avatar

    Gregory 420pm – Since what I’m suggesting is a straightforward business decision that would fatten their state coffers and not impact their own water consumption one whit, why do you think the Oregonians would oppose such a decision if it penciled out?

    Like

  13. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    GR 231-
    4K af is a simplistic and meaningless number in and of itself. The Delta is a dynamic system where EC changes are due to the whim of upstream releases, downstream pumping, tides and even wind direction. Right now we are balanced at maximum allowable EC at several of our pumping stations. CEQA has been relaxed due to the drought emergency and already delta farms are switching to more salt tolerant crops. Unfortunately, salt intrusion leaves a footprint that can last decades. The primary objection by EBMUD to establish pumping at Freeport rather than on the American River itself (where they have water rights) was the threat of salt water intrusion. In less than a decade that threat is looming. My guess is that 4k is nothing more than a dart tossed at a moving target. . . a target that is already hard to hit and no one knows where the bullseye is. I would error on the side of maintaining a stong fresh water current moving salt ward. A nice, but abbreviated link would be: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/drinking_water_policy/salinity_conceptual_model/pgs28_38.pdf

    Like

  14. Brad C. Avatar
    Brad C.

    Forget the bullet train, we need a big pipe from a reliable water source.

    Like

  15. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Brad is correct. When I traveled to Idaho last year in November thru Oregon, all the rivers and lakes there were full. The Columbia River was topped out. I though why can’t we build a p[pipeline from the Columbia to say Shasta?

    Like

  16. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    State estimates put just the yearly maintance costs of a large network of water tunnels proposed at….drum roll please….at over 30 billion a year on the lowest conservative side….that is after the tunnels are built. We are screwed. People, fish, saltwater intrusion all competing for a limited water supply. Washington State has water, but they use it to sell us electricity. They also say they are in a drought. If we take their water, there goes some of our grid. Double screwed. It’s Arizona’s time to get the lion’s share of the Colorado River water. They waited their turn and per agreements lawfully executed by both states many moons ago, that date way out in the future has arrived and now much less Colorado River water is earmarked for the cement ponds and golf courses from Palm Springs to Beverly Hills. Arizona’s population is growing and they have the legal papers in their now wet little hands. Arizona’s people come first. We are triple screwed.
    Let’s meet at the park and do a rain dance. Or, build a pipeline from Canada to LA.

    Like

  17. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Todd, if we took one drop of water from the Columbia River, the good citizens of The Evergreen State would storm Olympia and hang the Governor and the entire legislature in the public square within an hour. Just the topic of selling hot tub lubbing crazy California a single gallon of Washington State water would create a dangerous situation as riots and infuriated passions would flame the herd mentality and the ensuing wholesale bloodshed. The results would be unspeakable. “Kill the beast, kill the beast!”

    Like

  18. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    Transporting Oregon water to Californians in California who will make more Californians with it will never fly in the northwest. It isn’t something one can analyze rationally. It ain’t economics at work.
    If Californians want Oregon water I’d suggest moving there and getting new Oregon license plates, drivers license and passport as soon as possible before too many figure out where they’re from.

    Like

  19. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    “Forget the bullet train, we need a big pipe from a reliable water source.”
    California is blessed a Mediterranean climate and the best irrigable soils in the world. We are also blessed with an 800 mile coastline, where, at any point, we can extract fresh water from the sea. Pipelines from the Columbia River? WTF?

    Like

  20. George Rebane Avatar

    Noone still answered why Oregon would object to revenues from water exports that do not affect their own water supply. Why the crickets?

    Like

  21. Gregory Avatar
    Gregory

    no crickets,GR. they’d be happy to take the money … Californians vacationing in OR are welcome to fill up their canteens on their way home. more than that… dream on.

    Like

  22. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Joe Š, “where at any point we can extract fresh water from the sea.” Me thinks you better run that by the California Coastal Commission prior to drawing up plans. They have already ordered the removal of rooftop wind turbines from homes along the coast.
    Meanwhile, the good residences of the little subdivision down in Big Oak Valley near Beale (called Golden Oaks or something) just received the splendid news that their HOA is charging each residence a measly 400 plus bucks a month for water services. They might need to import fresh water from coastal desalination operations. Just a helpful hint.

    Like

  23. Brad C. Avatar
    Brad C.

    Nuclear desalination? Diablo Canyon would make a super tea kettle.

    Like

  24. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    Bill 3:27
    Does the stork bring you your news?
    California has two dozen desal plants in operation including the 56 million gallon/day operation in Carlsbad. Browns emergency drought declaration specifically allows desal to be built without jumping through normal CEQA channels.

    Like

  25. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Joe Š, I stand corrected. 24 desal plants along our 800 mile coast? Wow, I had no idea there is one every 33 miles of coastline. If we build another two dozen, then that would be a desal plant every 16 miles of coastline. Just hope the rising sea levels don’t mess with them.
    Yep, time the coastal beautiful folks send us some fresh water. It’s only fair.

    Like

  26. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    All our desal plants can explain those fish and marine mammals wasting up dead on the beaches. It’s getting too salty for them. That’s what happens when you let up on regulations.

    Like

  27. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    In your view what is an adequate fresh water flow in the Delta to avoid salt water intrusion?

    Like

  28. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    George, is there any data or info about the Delta inflows and outflows prior to the dams of the last century? I recall that before Spaulding was built the South Yuba would go dry in the summer.

    Like

  29. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    Paul-
    You are asking for a very simple answer to an extremely complex and dynamic situation. First of all, where does intrusion start? The salt/fresh mixing zone used to be in Suisun Bay near Fairfield. Today it is near Rio Vista.
    Todd-
    There are tons of data at your fingertips if you know how to use Google.In a nutshell, prior to the construction of Rim Dams the Delta was above sea level and salt water intrusion occurred around Fairfield (see above). The Delta used to be a giant marsh, but was drained and captured behind levee walls to keep the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers from flooding the area. Due to ground subsidence the Delta is now below sea level. The ocean wants to fill the area. Adding to that the pumps draw so much water that the San Joaquin flows uphill and sucks salt water in behind it.

    Like

  30. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Got some links to back that up? It does not seem physically possible as you describe it.

    Like

  31. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 913am, Toddj 921am – yes, there is a lot of historical, often conflicting, data on the delta. And as joes’ 1009am points out, it is a complex system of flows and levels that are now (completely?) managed by Man. The only things that have not been reliably established are the discomfort levels of fish if historical pumping rates to the south San Joachin and soCal are maintained. Like most of the rulings from the EPA and CEPA, new delta management protocols are based on politics and little science.
    All of these policies can be most easily integrated and understood when we recall that the ultimate A21 objective is to remove humans from the Sierra. More complex and confusing explanations are also available for faithful.

    Like

  32. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Since in your view there is little reliable date to base reasonable decisions on would it not be prudent to set a high threshold till this information is available. That, by the way, is a very conservative position in a classical sense. Tread lightly because the consequences of miscalculation could cause great harm.
    You did not attempt to answer my basic question of estimations salt water intrusion. Instead you deflected it towards A21, the usual scratch pad for anything not explained.

    Like

  33. Paul Emery Avatar

    Wording it differently George do we know without a reasonable doubt that diverting more water from the Delta would NOT cause drastic harm to the environment?

    Like

  34. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 1251pm – I didn’t “deflect towards A21”, I don’t know the levels of salt water intrusion, nor can interpret their impact even if someone gave me the God’s truth numbers for them (which interpretation I submit is not reliably known by anyone today). But I could expand my opinion in a cogent direction by explaining away the liberal’s decision as being coherent with outline A21 objectives for humanity.
    A21, as far as the Left’s public policies are concerned, is far from being “the usual scratch pad for anything not explained”. But it is the long-established label that embraces all such policies based on reasons explained and not explained. In short, attributing A21 satisfies Occam’s razor.
    Now, if we wish to “tread lightly” in the absence of reliable information, then under almost all conceivable utility functions the policy of ‘Don’t fix it if it ain’t broke’ applies as the lightest tread.

    Like

  35. Russ Steele Avatar

    Paul@12:59PM
    Studies show that the San Francisco Bay marshes have experienced more salinity about 600 years ago than the salinity of the marshes are today, about 22.5%. This increase in salinity started about 1800 years ago when it was about 16%, when California experiences some very long droughts. Thirty years from 1021-1051, 40 years from 1130-1170, 25 five years from 1240-1265 and 22 years from 1360-1382. After peaking about 580 years ago, it declined. The average is now slightly lower than the peak of 23.5% 580 years ago. So, we have a paleo record of what happens in the Bay when salinity increases. We have been living in a relatively wet period and could experience some very long droughts in the near future.

    Like

  36. Paul Emery Avatar

    So George in your view any concern for the intrusion of salt water into the delta is consistent with support for A21? Don’t you think that deciding on the side of caution is justifiable in such a crucial matter? That, by the way is a true Conservative position. If the effect isn’t known than how can it be justifiable to continue? Gold miners had their “Canarie in the cave” to warn them of the lack of oxygen. Is it possible that the preservation of certain fish fulfills that function? If not that what do you recommend or should we have any indicators at all?

    Like

  37. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    Todd 10:54.
    The information is so voluminous and so readily available, my guess is that you aren’t in the slightest bit curious and are simply flapping your tongue for the sake of flapping your tongue.
    Paul 12:59
    Present day water diversions (and pumping, and channel alteration, and sediment flow impairment, and . . . ) have drastically effected the Delta. More diversions will certainly effect the Delta even more. It is a question of what are we willing to live with and there are as many opinions as there are people in California.
    Russ 14:16
    You numbers are what I understand to be true. If CalFed gave us anything useful, it was a tremendous amount of information about the area. Pretty expensive and wasteful lesson none-the-less. The difference between high salinity 600 years ago and today is that back then hundreds of thousands of acres of crops and multiple millions of people didn’t depend on it for their existence.

    Like

  38. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 355pm et al – All the proponents of sending more fresh water through the delta into the ocean sound like they know what the quantitative impacts are on fish and agriculture (i.e. the transfer function). The fact is such knowledge is absent and brown science is put in its place which then true believers like you and others here immediately accept as revealed truth. My position is precisely that of a conservetarian trained in the sciences, among them being decision science. BTW, similar argumentation is offered by those claiming equal knowledge in the climate sciences which also is absent.

    Like

  39. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    JoeSmith 4:07 pm. As I suspected you have no links or data to back up yur claims and you refuse to answer my question. You are a fraud.

    Like

  40. Walt Avatar

    Hear the latest on Gov. insanity? The foretold “food police” have reared their ugly head.
    They demand we eat more vegetative matter over meat. ( Do they forget that takes water?)
    Hell! Even boobtube time needs to be “overseen”…( Now just how will the government plan on doing that???) Lefty “Big brother” is alive and well… Oh.. BTW,, This is all about fighting climate change. ( Their words,,, not mine…) No wonder LIBS want the young ones to smoke dope. You would need to, actually believe that crap.
    http://www.foodpolitics.com/

    Like

  41. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    Todd, you might simply start with Wikipedia then link out to their several hundred links. You could even be a super brainiac like my 9 year old daughter and Google CalFed. I refuse to hold your hand.
    George 512
    I am an environmental scientist, NOT to be confused with an environmentalist. I don’t know anything about fish, but the equilibrium between outstream flow and salt water intrusion is very well known. The debate is not about science, it is about money. On both sides.

    Like

  42. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    Backing up your claims is holding someone’s hand? JoeSmith, you are simply a fraud. Get on board the brain train and stop obfuscating. Your nine year old daughter expects nothing less from dada.

    Like

  43. George Rebane Avatar

    joes 652pm – Excellent Mr/Dr? smith. Then you will have no problem pointing me to the literature that contains the model which defines “equilibrium between outstream flow and salt water intrusion”. And I do hope that the model is not just a steady state solution to a set of partial differential flow equations which would give away the store on how “very well known” is such an intrusion. I know, and you should know, that we have here a dynamic process with sufficiently long time constants due to tidal effects, variability of fresh water inflows, and the large and complex configuration of the Sacramento River delta containing multiple estuaries. The stochasticities involved must be mind-boggling, therefore such systems cannot easily or at all be modeled as being at some point of deterministic equilibrium.
    (For the Sac delta the dynamic model should contain at a minimum 2N partial diff eqns where N is the number of estuaries impacted by tidal and fresh water flows. And at least another 2N to describe the error propagation through the affected portion of the delta.)
    Please feel free to counter this argument from the literature that includes measurements of the stable salinity levels corroborated by the equilibrium model. I love it when someone claims that the debate about the science involved is over, but do agree with your money observation.

    Like

  44. joe smith Avatar
    joe smith

    George 758P
    You are absolutely correct. In trying to dumb it down for Todd I come across as dumb (or ignorant, or trying to sell something). I’m not sure where this model is you are trying to hang your hat, or my neck on. I have never suggested there is any such a model, and in fact, denounce the proscribed models from USGS, USACE, and CalFed. That said, we DO have a very good handle on the fact that downstream push counteracts upstream push. The more flow we shove into the system, the further down system the salt water influx will occur.

    Like

  45. Russ Steele Avatar

    JoeS and George
    Here is a link to the river delta flow and salinity models: http://baydeltaoffice.water.ca.gov/modeling/deltamodeling/modelingdata/DEM.cfm
    Have fun!

    Like

  46. George Rebane Avatar

    joes 850pm – very well then, there must be some article in the literature that quantifies this downstream push counteracting with upstream push for the channels of the Sac delta. We both know that simply explaining that counteraction is a notch away from a tautology that should be useless for substantiating public policy on the water flows in question. My guess is that some environmentalist or, better, environmental scientist waved some such ‘model’ in front of legislators or their staff. Then arm-in-arm with fish comfort experts they fashioned the sad tale of how fish and land would be oversalted if we didn’t increase freshwater outflows into the delta estuaries.
    But I would be willing to bet a good part of the farm that there was nothing what I was taught and practiced as science involved with any of the water allocation policies now in effect and contemplated for the future. The policies are in their very nature corrupt and designed to satisfy larger political agendas and money flows.
    Still, whatever you can dig up on such models or even citations of data measurments would be of help. It is always interesting and fun to discover the crap that our ‘honorables’ foist on their gruberized constituencies. (Some years back I did a little study of the ‘science’ behind Nevada County’s ozone scare that was then in high dudgeon. The bullshit was immediately apparent, and the doors to further inquiries were immediately slammed shut.)

    Like

  47. Walt Avatar

    “O” is batting a thousand with his “revisionism” of the facts of history.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/20/obama-islam-woven-into-the-fabric-of-our-country-since-founding/
    Yes.. Insanity

    Like

  48. George Rebane Avatar

    RussS 912pm – Thanks for the link, but it does not connect to any models. It only connects to a very long and confusing project hopes document on what should be done with CalSim II, the so-called model whose peer reviewed shortcomings and unfinished parts are legion. Most certainly it is not ready to substantiate any public policies. (Read Sec 4)
    The overall development program contemplated will take a very big and capable science and software engineering team. That the California Water Resources Board could manage such a project is simply a pipedream.
    My former assessment about the technical background for California’s water policies was that it is based on a handful of heuristics and bucket load of brown numbers – both more than sufficient to bamboozle the innumerates. There was nothing on that website to recommend changing this assessment. I am afraid that joe smith’s ‘equilibrium model’ is nothing beyond a textbook exposition of a simple fluid mixing model derived for an idealized river/stream channel. Derivation of such an idealized model would be standard fare for a sophomore or junior level physics major.
    Bottom line, the evidence at hand is not very convincing for supporting any water diversion policy to knowledgeably impact the delta’s fish, fowl, and farms.

    Like

  49. Don Bessee Avatar
    Don Bessee

    Sounds like Paul E does not subscribe to Darwin. Please review the number of species that came and went before us. If we interrupt that cycle are we helping or hurting? Why with the absolutist science as god view so prevalent that we hear every day of ‘we just found this or that we never saw’? It is the don’t keep score in kiddie soccer world view filters at play with PE.

    Like

  50. Russ Steele Avatar

    George@10:02PM
    The models are listed on the right side of the page. Click on the models link and it expands the selection of models.
    Section Pages
    Central Valley Modeling
    Delta Modeling
    Computer Assistance

    Like

Leave a comment