Menu



SharePromoteReport Abuse
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1158
48109 Posts
48109
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/19/2017 11:14:17 AM

Wireless Technologies Have An Epigenetic Effect On Children

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

New Reply
+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1158
48109 Posts
48109
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/19/2017 4:53:20 PM



Investigator: DNC Staffer Seth Rich Leaked 44K Emails to WikiLeaks Before His Murder

May 16, 2017 at 10:23 am

The former D.C. detective, hired by Rich’s family, indicated to local Fox affiliate Fox 5 that “there is tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death.”Wheeler believes the murder is being covered up and said a source inside the department told him D.C. police have been told not to investigate the case.

According to Wheeler:

The police department nor the FBI have been forthcoming. They haven’t been cooperating at all. I believe that the answer to solving his death lies on that computer, which I believe is either at the police department or either at the FBI. I have been told both.”

“I have a source inside the police department that has looked at me straight in the eye and said, ‘Rod, we were told to stand down on this case and I can’t share any information with you.’ Now, that is highly unusual for a murder investigation, especially from a police department. Again, I don’t think it comes from the chief’s office, but I do believe there is a correlation between the mayor’s office and the DNC and that is the information that will come out [Tuesday].”

Asked if his sources have told him that information exists linking Rich to Wikileaks, he said, “Absolutely. Yeah. That’s confirmed.”

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange gave no comment on the allegations but has not denied working with Rich and retweeted the breaking story shortly after it broke Monday evening. Wikileaks has offered a reward of $20,000 for information leading to the conviction of the murderer, and Assangepreviously implied Rich was involved in the leaks.

A spokesman for Rich’s family, Brad Bauman, stated Tuesday that the family had not authorized Wheeler to speak on their behalf and wanted to keep the focus on finding Seth’s murderers.

“Even if tomorrow, an email was found, it is not a high enough bar of evidence to prove any interactions as emails can be altered and we’ve seen that those interested in pushing conspiracies will stop at nothing to do so. We are a family who is committed to facts, not fake evidence that surfaces every few months to fill the void and distract law enforcement and the general public from finding Seth’s murderers,” said Bauman.

Regardless, Fox News released a separate, full report on Tuesday with new details on the investigation Tuesday morning, dropping the bombshell that a federal investigator has corroborated Wheeler’s claims. The outlet reported that “an FBI forensic report of Rich’s computer — generated within 96 hours after Rich’s murder — showed he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time, the federal source told Fox News.”

According to the report, “44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21.”

D.C. police insisted they’re working with the family to find the killers, offering a reward of $25,000 for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible, while a separate reward of$130,000 has been offered by Republican lobbyist Jack Burman.

According to the anonymous federal investigator, he has “seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks” and says the FBI is in possession of the damning evidence. It is important to note that the mainstream media, including the Washington Post, has been widely criticized for citing anonymous sources in its reporting on Russian election hacking claims.

Regardless, the FBI has not yet commented on the allegations.

Editor’s Update: Since this story was published, Wheeler has attempted to back peddle is previous statements, saying he relied on claims issued to him by Fox and did not personally have evidence to suggest Rich contacted Wikileaks. Anti-Media will continue to update our site with developments on the story.





"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

New Reply
+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1158
48109 Posts
48109
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/19/2017 5:31:55 PM


Climate change spells dry times ahead for the West



This story was originally published by High Country News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Picture a snowflake drifting down from a frigid February sky in western Colorado and settling high in the Rocky Mountains. By mid-April, the alpine snowpack is likely at its peak. Warming temperatures in May or June will then melt the snow, sending droplets rushing down a mountain stream or seeping into the soil to replenish an aquifer.

The West’s water supply depends on each of these interconnected sources: the frozen reservoir of snow atop mountain peaks, mighty rivers like the Colorado, and groundwater reserves deep below the earth’s surface. But the snowpack is becoming less reliable, one of the region’s most important rivers is diminishing, and in many places the groundwater level has dropped. Three recent studies illuminate the magnitude of these declines, the role climate change has played, and the outlook for the future.

All three studies point to the influence of a warming climate. “Climate change is real, it’s here now, it’s serious, and it’s impacting our water supplies in a way that will affect all of us,” says Bradley Udall, a water and climate researcher at Colorado State University. The situation is dire, he says, but reining in greenhouse gas emissions now could help keep the mountains covered with snow and the rivers and aquifers wet.

The Colorado RiverJ Brew

The study: “The 21st century Colorado River hot drought and implications for the future,” Water Resources Research, February/March 2017.

The takeaway: On average, Colorado River flows were nearly 20 percent lower between 2000 and 2014 compared to the historical norm. Warm weather caused by climate change — not just a lack of precipitation — was the culprit. As the mercury continues to climb, the Colorado could drop by more than half by century’s end.

What it means: The Colorado River basin has been in a drought since 2000. Warmer-than-normal temperatures were responsible for about a third of the flow declines. The upper basin is 1.6 degrees F warmer now than during the 1900s, meaning more water is lost to the atmosphere through evaporation from soil, streams, and other water bodies. Plants also use more water when it’s hot, partly because the growing season is longer.

Declining flows will further stress the already over-allocated river, which supplies nearly 40 million people in two countries. The authors note that the basin would need a precipitation spike of 4 to 20 percent to counterbalance the flow-reducing effect of future warmer temperatures — “a major and unprecedented change” compared to the past.

Arizona, California, and Nevada have been negotiating to reduce their demands on the Colorado, but haven’t agreed on a final plan to address future shortages. “Frankly, that drought contingency plan needs to be put in place just to deal with the river as it is today,” Udall, a study coauthor, told the Washington Post. And while the plan will help get the lower basin into balance, it may not be enough to deal with future declines big enough to impact the entire basin, which also includes parts of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.


The study: “Large near-term projected snowpack loss over the western United States,” Nature Communications, April 2017.

The takeaway: The West’s mountain snowpack supplies about two-thirds of the region’s water. But it dropped by 10 to 20 percent between the 1980s and 2000s. Within the next three decades, the snowpack could further shrink by as much as 60 percent.

What it means: Measurements of the amount of water held within snow from hundreds of stations from Washington to New Mexico revealed the extent of the decline in recent decades. Simulations showed that natural elements alone, like volcanic and solar activity, were not enough to account for the dip. Including factors influenced by humans — like changes in greenhouse gas concentrations — produced models that matched historical reality, implicating climate change as the cause of the snowpack loss.

The study’s predictions for the future range from a drastic drop in snowpack to even a slight gain by 2040. Climate change alone will likely cause a further decrease of about 30 percent, says study coauthor John Fyfe, a researcher at Environment and Climate Change Canada. But natural variations in atmospheric conditions above the Pacific could temporarily make the decline worse — or nix it, depending on how they fluctuate. So water managers need to be prepared for both extremes. “It’s a cyclic phenomenon,” Fyfe says. “It’s eventually going to come around and bite you.”


The study: “Depletion and response of deep groundwater to climate-induced pumping variability,” Nature Geoscience, January 2017.

The takeaway: Aquifers have been drawn down in several areas across the country. In parts of California and Nevada, however, groundwater levels have actually risen, perhaps reflecting the success of regulations and recharge projects.

What it means: Aquifer levels declined in about half of the deep groundwater wells monitored nationwide between 1940 and 2015. The lower Mississippi basin, the High Plains over the Ogallala Aquifer, and California’s Central Valley overall have experienced some of the nation’s highest rates of groundwater depletion in recent years. The study found that during dry periods, water users pump more even as natural recharge diminishes, leading to rapid drawdowns in aquifers.Regional studies in Idaho and California reveal a similar pattern of overdraft, particularly during droughts. That can lead to dry wells, land subsidence, ecological damage, and other problems.

Sometimes, however, those trends can be reversed. Researchers also found that groundwater levels rose in about 20 percent of the wells, including around Las Vegas and in limited sections of the Central Valley, while the remainder of the wells showed no change. Tess Russo, a hydrologist at Pennsylvania State University and study coauthor, cautions that the groundwater level increases could be misleading in places — some wells were monitored for as little as ten years, and if that period happened to be particularly rainy, measurements may not represent an area’s long-term history.

But wet periods and groundwater recharge projects have helped replenish some aquifers. “In many cases, we have plenty of water,” Russo says. Alleviating water stress may be a matter of changing policies and management, including how and where specific crops are grown.


(GRIST)

"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

New Reply
+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1158
48109 Posts
48109
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/19/2017 5:53:47 PM


Rising seas are lapping at the shores of the world’s poorest countries
Cross-posted from Climate Central

Coastal residents of poor and fast-growing tropical countries face rapid increases in the numbers of once-rare floods they may face as seas rise, with a new statistical analysis offering troubling projections for regions where sea-level data is sparse.

Stark increases in instances of flooding are projected for Pacific islands, parts of Southeast Asia, and coastlines along India, Africa, and South America in the years and decades ahead — before spreading to engulf nearly the entire tropical region, according to a study led by Sean Vitousek, a researcher at the University of Illinois, Chicago.

Residents of Kerala in southern India face sharp increases in the number of floods in the years ahead.Thejas Panarkandy

“Imagine what it might feel like to live on a low-lying island nation in the Pacific, where not only your home, but your entire nation might be drowned,” Vitousek said.

The researchers combined a statistical technique used to analyze extreme events with models simulating waves, storms, tides, and the sea level effects of global warming. They created snapshots of the future — flood projections that can be difficult to generate with the limited ocean data available in some places.

“If it’s easy to flood with smaller water levels coming from the ocean side, then gradual sea-level rise can have a big impact,” Vitousek said. “For places like the Pacific islands in the middle of nowhere that don’t have any data, we can make an assessment for what’s going to happen.”

The study found that the frequency of formerly once-in-50-year floods could double in some tropical places in the decades ahead. The findings were published Thursday in the Nature journal Scientific Reports.

Red areas in this map represent large projected increases in the frequency of floods following 10 centimeters (four inches) of additional sea-level rise.Vitousek et al.

“This is the first paper I’ve seen that tries to combine all these different elements in the context of sea-level rise,” said Richard Smith, a statistics professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who studies environmental change. “They’ve done it in a very systematic and well organized way.”

The tropics are home to some of the world’s most vulnerable coastal residents, often living in houses made from flimsy construction materials, under governments that have limited ability to provide food, water, and care when disasters strike.

“Many poor developing countries like Bangladesh are going to see greater frequency and magnitude of flood events — even with the best efforts to reduce emissions,” said Saleemul Huq, director of the International Center for Climate Change and Development in Bangladesh.

Residents of these sweltering regions have released little of the greenhouse gas pollution that’s warming the Earth’s surface, melting ice and expanding ocean water, and causing seas to rise. Global temperatures have risen nearly 2 degrees F since the 1800s.

“These vulnerable countries and communities need to be supported to improve early warning and safe shelters — followed by economic support to recover afterwards,” Huq said.

All coastal regions face risks from rising seas, though the nature of the hazards varies. Seas are rising at about an inch per decade globally, at an accelerating rate with several feet or more of sea rise likely this century. Detailed information on water levels in many vulnerable places, however, is sparse.

“Understanding of sea-level rise in the tropics is challenging because there’s a lack of long-term data,” said Benjamin Horton, a Rutgers professor who wasn’t involved with the study. “Tide gauges were installed for navigation in ports; big trade was between the industrialized nations of Europe and [the] U.S.”

Unlike vulnerable cities and towns along the East Coast of the U.S., where frequent storms and big waves lead to large variations in day-to-day water levels, tropical coastlines tend to be surrounded by waters with depths that vary less. That means many tropical coastlines were not built to withstand the kinds of routine flooding that will be caused by rising seas.


(GRIST)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

New Reply
+1
Luis Miguel Goitizolo

1158
48109 Posts
48109
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: ARE WE NOW IN THE END TIMES?
5/19/2017 11:35:38 PM
No Entry

Not interested in truth: U.S. rejects Putin's offer to share transcript of contentious Trump-Lavrov meeting

US rejects and ridicules unprecedented Russian offer though it offers the one opportunity of ascertaining beyond all doubt what actually happened at the meeting between Trump and Lavrov.


The US political and media establishment has rejected and even ridiculed President Putin's offer to Congress of the transcripts of the meeting in the Oval Office between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US President Donald Trump.

The prevailing response to the offer is that it was not intended seriously. The tone was set by BBC journalist who speaking on British television claimed that in making the offer Putin was having, and was just trolling the US, and that there is "no possibility" of the US accepting a transcript written on "Kremlin notepaper".

This is to misrepresent what was a perfectly serious offer despite the humorous tone with which Putin spoke.

That the offer was intended entirely seriously can be judged by the words Putin used when he made the offer
As for the results of Foreign Minister Lavrov's visit to the United States and his meeting with President Trump, we assess the results highly. This was the first visit, a return visit by our foreign minister, after we received US Secretary of State Tillerson here in Moscow.

This is normal and natural international practice. At the same time, however, we see the growing political schizophrenia in the United States. There is no other way I can explain the accusations against the current president that he handed whichever secrets over to Lavrov.

Incidentally, I spoke with him [Lavrov] today about this matter, and I will have to give him a ticking off for not sharing these secrets with me. Not with me, nor with our intelligence officials. This was really not good of him at all.

What's more, if the US administration has no objection, we are ready to provide a transcript of Lavrov's conversation with Trump to the US Senate and Congress. Of course, we would do this only if the American administration so desires.

Initially, when we watched the first developments in this internal political struggle, we were amused. But now, the spectacle is becoming quite simply sad, and it is causing us concern, because it is hard to imagine just how far people willing to think up this kind of nonsense and absurdity might go. All of this is ultimately about fanning anti-Russian sentiment.

This does not surprise me. They are using anti-Russian slogans to destabilize the internal political situation in the United States, but they do not realise that they are harming their own country. If this is the case, then they are quite simply stupid. If they do understand what they are doing, then they are dangerous and unscrupulous people. In any event, this is the United States' own affair and we have no intention of getting involved.

As for assessments of President Trump's actions so far in office, this too is not our affair. It is for the American people, American voters, to give their assessment. Of course, this will be possible only once he is fully allowed to work.(bold italics added)
An important point about Putin - and one which I have made previously, and which was very obvious to me on the two occasions when I have seen him in person (at the two SPIEF conferences which I have attended in St. Petersburg in 2014 and 2016) - is that he is one of those people who uses humour to hide their anger.

It does not follow from this that when Putin makes jokes it always and invariably means that he is angry. However it sometimes does, so that when he laughs and makes jokes in a certain way it can be interpreted - and is interpreted by those around him - as a warning sign. The words I have highlighted show that this was one such case.

What these words show is that far from "enjoying" the US political crisis - as the BBC journalist crassly imagines - Putin is furious that relations with Russia are being used as a weapon in an internal US political conflict which he characterises - correctly - as a power struggle. He is also aghast at the ruthlessness and cynicism of the people who are doing it, whom he characterises as "dangerous and unscrupulous" (he obviously doesn't think they are "stupid"). He also judges them completely irresponsible, saying - also correctly - that they are destabilising the political situation in their own country.

As for the offer of the transcript, there is no doubt this was seriously intended.

To repeat my explanation from before, at any high level diplomatic meeting senior officials are accompanied by interpreters whose job is not just to translate what is said but also to make a verbatim written record of what is said.

Both the US and Russians would have had such people present at the meeting between Trump and Lavrov, and both sets of these people would have made a verbatim record of what was said during the meeting.

These records - scribbled by the interpreters in shorthand - are then written up into a proper transcript and are if necessary circulated to other senior officials and throughout the bureaucracy. They then become an essential part of the diplomatic archive of whichever country the officials taking part in the meeting belong to.

It is through consulting such transcripts when archives are opened that diplomatic historians can reconstruct the course of negotiations when they write their diplomatic histories. In the meantime it is a fundamental rule of international diplomacy that until that happens - usually many decades later - records like these are kept confidential, and are not released without the agreement of both sides taking part in the discussions.

What Putin was offering - as his words clearly show - was an agreement with the US whereby the Russians would provide the US Congress with their transcript. The US would obviously be in a position to check its accuracy against its own, or in the alternative it could also provide the Congress with its own.

Far from being intended as a joke, this is a highly unusual and almost unprecedented offer, the making of which shows how seriously Putin and the Russians are taking the situation.

Of course the offer was refused even though it is the best and simplest way of finding out what actually happened at the meeting between Trump and Lavrov in the Oval Office.

This of course shows the real agenda of those who have been spreading stories about the meeting. They are not really interested in finding out what actually happened at the meeting.

They have now had clearcut denials of the original Washington Post story from almost everyone who was present or was involved, not just from Putin and Lavrov, but also from Trump, McMaster, Tillerson, and Dina Powell. McMaster has toured the television stories repeatedly calling out the Washington Post story as "false".

Yet in spite of these denials from the most senior officials of the US and Russian governments, they continue to believe - or pretend to believe - the anonymous sources which were behind the Washington Post article, who almost certainly were not there.

They have also rejected - and misrepresented and ridiculed - a serious and unprecedented offer from the Russian government which would once and for all settle the truth of the matter.

Putin called these people "dangerous and unscrupulous". Their response to his offer shows he is right.


(sott.net)


"Choose a job you love and you will not have to work a day in your life" (Confucius)

New Reply
+1


facebook
Like us on Facebook!