Search Results for '44'

[nwgardening]

Those who signed the petition requesting a public hearing regarding the proposed rowhouse project on 55th Ave SW should have been contacted by now by the city with information about the meeting. In case that information didn’t reach you, here it is.

Date: Wednesday, July 17

Time: 6:30 – 8 p.m.

Where: Youngstown Cultural Arts Center, 4408 Delridge Way SW

This is a SEPA environmental meeting – comments (written or oral) submitted should address the environmental impact of the project. The meeting is open to the public.

There’s a lot to talk about, from parking issues to potential flooding problems and sewage overflows into Puget Sound. For more information go to http://www.whereiamnow.net/ and click on Alki Rowhouse Controversy.

[Wesalvage]

I would like to know more about this. Call me at 360 441 1964

Cheri

[miws]

I so dislike our President.

Yes, we know.

And you continue to show it, by continuing to

Mike

[webshaf]

Here’s another Distibudoors satisfied customer! Dusty took care of my snapping cables and a little extra work to keep everything in good shape for many years to come. 206-443-1640.

Thanks to the wonderful WSBers for the good referrals that always send me in the right direction!!

[funkietoo]

ANIMALE Wine Tasting, Gourmet Spud Bar, Craft Brew, Live Music & Silent Auction

Date: Sunday, June 30th

Time: 5 pm – 8 pm

Event Location: Ola Salon, 2942 Avalon Way SW, 206-933-6702

Admission Donation: $20.00 Adv; $25.00 At Door (provides fabulous potato bar & wine tasting)

Special Guest Appearance: The Famous Oskar the Blind Cat and his buddy Klaus

Live Music Guest: Tres Sway

‘Twenty years’, says Delyn Kosbab, Founder of Kitty Harbor, ‘I’ve been doing cat rescue, rehabilitation and adoptions for 20 years! During this time I have rescued and adopted out, or Trapped/Neutered/Returned,15,000 plus cats. It is time to celebrate and raise money to improve Kitty Harbor’s facility so we can get on with the next 20 years!

Terese Machmiller, the Mastermind Planner behind this event explains, ‘After volunteering onsite for eight months, I wanted to do more, so when I heard that Kitty Harbor wanted to raise $7,000 for a ring worm isolation room to prevent cross-contamination, and to install a security system, ‘SpudNeuter!’ was launched.

‘We hope you will join us for an evening of silent auction, live music, wine-tasting, gourmet potato bar and celebration in the beautiful setting of Ola Salon in West Seattle,’ says Melody, Kitty Harbor onsite caretaker & right-hand Woman.

Get your advance tickets, starting June 14th, at any one of our Outlets:

•Ola Salon: 2942 Avalon Way SW; (206) 933-6702; http://www.olasalon.com/

•The Wash Dog: 6400 California Avenue SW; (206) 935-4546; http://www.thewashdog.com/

•Kitty Harbor, 3422 Harbor Ave SW; (206) 935-1919; info@kittyharborseattle.org

•Hotwire Online Coffeehouse; 4410 Cal Ave SW; (206) 935.1510, info@hotwirecoffee.com

To see the flyer and full press release please go to: http://www.facebook.com/events/166633093508761/

and feel free to ‘share’ it!

info@kittyharborseattle.org

temachmiller@gmail.com

Website: http://www.kittyharborseattle.org/about/

[hammerhead]

Call my friend Marit, she grooms dogs. I asked her I could pass her info along and she said yes.

206-371-4469.

She has a car and supplies if needed.

HH

[JanS]

where was the outrage then?:

[JanS]

[WSNative66]

I just ran across a great plant sale when I was walking the stairs above Lincoln Park. It’s at 8401 44th Ave. SW. Nice plants, great prices.

[celeste17]

Hi, I found this 3 bedroom house for rent. http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/10941-24th-Ave-SW-Seattle-WA-98146/49086443_zpid/

Other than this it would be an apartment or a condo for rent and it probably would be a 1 bedroom.

[wakeflood]

I just saw this article about a former Conservative reminiscing about the Morton Downey Jr. show. There’s a new documentary coming out about it.

Has a couple great quotes in the article that I thought summarized things nicely.

One is that he reiterates the notion that MDJ begat Limbaugh/O’Reilly shoutdown tv just like Lee Atwater begat Turd Blossom modern dirty political tricks.

The other quote that I thought is wonderfully succinct and spot on is this:

“Post-Reagan conservatism is largely based on stunted, undeveloped, childish, contra-empirical ideas about the world — ideas that both confirm and enable simplistic notions about the role of government in society.”

He goes on…”The success of the Downey show was due to the carefully choreographed delivery of the ideas from an authoritative, alpha-male role model who wasn’t afraid to throw down like a testosterone-possessed teenage boy. He was a heavy metal political rocker without the long hair and leather and he used the persona to tap into that politically immature mindset.”

Hoping we figure out how to move on to a better political zeitgeist asap.

A link to the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/25-years-later-morton-dow_b_3397844.html

[Al]

Just a reminder for some folks that WSBC holds monthly meetings the first Tuesday of each month, starting at 6:30 pm. They have been more regularly held at Cycle U. Our next meeting will be July 2 for those interested.

A bunch of us were at the Seattle Bike Master Plan open house tonight at City Hall. If you want to see and want West Seattle to be heard, the draft is now online. You can join an online presentation Thurs June 6 at noon (today!), or the next open house at Columbia Branch Library next Wednesday. A few of us will be train/biking there if you’d like to join us.

We can’t do it for you. To be heard politically we need lots of participation! So come if you can.

More info can be found here: http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/bikemaster.htm

In addition to the upcoming Seattle Bike Master Plan meeting at the Columbia Branch Library on June 12, there is a Waterfront Seattle Street & Transit update presentation on June 26 at the WA State Convention Center.

There’s more information at the link below. Be sure to register, they are asking for registration confirmation it seems.

http://waterfrontseattle.org/?utm_source=Waterfront+Seattle&utm_campaign=d8330c21ad-Mar_20_Thank_You&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8a04326f5a-d8330c21ad-300951445

[COH]

Upward Soccer is coming to Community of Hope in Highland Park June 18-22nd, 2013. Upward Sports (upward.org) is the world’s largest Christian sports league for children and provides the BEST sports experience for every child. Upward Sports teaches sport fundamentals in an environment of healthy competition, helping kids to develop skills for the sports arena, and values for life. Community of Hope is offering an Upward Soccer Camp for kids K5-5th (13/14 school year). With daily practices and games from 1:00pm to 4:30pm, this camp is family-friendly and fun for everyone! The deadline to register is June 12th. Use coupon code “wsb-13” for a $15 discount. Contact Community of Hope today at 206-762-8044 or http://www.gothope365.com/events/upward for more information or to register.

[Myr-myr]

Do you have a patio umbrella for sale or give-away. I don’t need the stand, just the umbrella. 206.344.3338

[mbkreiger]

We’re house cleaning and giving away an old Fiesta gas BBQ grill, and an ikea tv stand.

Both are sitting roadside on our lawn at 4421 Graham street SW between 44th and 45th ave SW. First come first serve.d. It’s free so take it if u want it or well give it to charity tomorrow.

[JesseMWa]

Hello! My wife and I just started excellent new jobs, and we’re having to deal with pretty conflicting schedules for the training periods.

We are urgently looking for a nanny to cover days that we both work as early as Thursday, June 6th, with a more regular schedule to follow shortly.

The position is in-home, at our nice little place a block from Lincoln Park. If you, or anyone you know, may be interested, please contact us ASAP!

Cheers!

602-330-4421

or

Celestedroid@gmail.com

[miws]

This is today! And tomorrow!

Another perk of shopping the F3 Plant Sale, are the free smiles!

Yes, smiles!

Free!

And that’s smileS!

Plural!

Yes, in addition to very reasonably priced plants, the F3 Gang will toss in smiles!

Free!

Always!

Mike

[Jeff H]

Stu is at it again, and I’ll be helping with his DIY Bikes project. Yes…free bicycle repair!

Where: West Seattle Tool Library, Youngstown Cultural Arts Center, 4408 Delridge Way SW

When: Sunday, June 2nd, 1-5pm

Why: Because it’s free and you can learn a lot.

Event info also posted at:

http://westseattlebikeconnections.org/events/diy-bikes-free-bicycle-repair-2013-06-02/

[concernedinws]

5446 46th Avenue SW

Contents of house including: Eastlake style dining room table and hutch, oak entertainment center, Mission style recliners, art supplies (paper, rubber stamps, etc), outdoor pots, paintings, grandfather clock, kitchen “stuff”.

All must go! Make us an offer we can’t refuse!

[WorldCitizen]

OK, I’ll bite. Instead of reading the summary which was digested and regurgitated for online reading, why don’t you take the words directly from the study itself. If you haven’t seen it yet (and of course you’ve seen it, right? Why else would you make such non-specious claims) then here is a link to it:

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf/1748-9326_8_2_024024.pdf

Of particular interest to me (and I hope you) is this passage from page #3 stating a few facts about the sample size and the justification for their methods:

“The ISI search generated 12 465 papers. Eliminating papers

that were not peer-reviewed (186), not climate-related (288) or

without an abstract (47) reduced the analysis to 11 944 papers

written by 29 083 authors and published in 1980 journals.

To simplify the analysis, ratings were consolidated into

three groups: endorsements (including implicit and explicit;

categories 1–3 in table 2), no position (category 4) and

rejections (including implicit and explicit; categories 5–7).”

They go on to explain rather neatly why there is a rather large percentage of papers (not scientists) with no position on the subject. Its on page 5 under the discussion section, but I figured I’d post the most relevant portion here for your perusal:

“Of note is the large proportion of abstracts that state no

position on AGW. This result is expected in consensus situations where scientists ‘. . . generally focus their discussions

on questions that are still disputed or unanswered rather

than on matters about which everyone agrees’ (Oreskes 2007,

p 72). This explanation is also consistent with a description

of consensus as a ‘spiral trajectory’ in which ‘initially

intense contestation generates rapid settlement and induces

a spiral of new questions’ (Shwed and Bearman 2010);

the fundamental science of AGW is no longer controversial

among the publishing science community and the remaining

debate in the field has moved to other topics. This is supported

by the fact that more than half of the self-rated endorsement

papers did not express a position on AGW in their abstracts.”

This is why making assumptions about things which you have absolutely NO knowledge of is a big problem when trying to convence others of your point. You’ve obviously done a bit of reading on this subject. When it comes to this study in particular your reading was misguided and incomplete. From the answers and analysis you’ve given on the Climate Change thread it seems to further be fueled by special interests and no-peer reviewed journals of any kind. All I’m trying to do is point out the logical inconsistencies in your arguments and lead you to a realm where we can talk about facts and not opinion.

Please do us all a favor and read the actual study, make your analysis and get back to us with your answers. I’ll gladly discuss them with you in a civil and rational manner.

[Christine J]

Why don’t you call me for details as to when to pick up? I’m at 8444 18th SW. I’m flexible as to when I can meet you. Thanks!

[ZOne]

The Mother Jones Article provides a link to John Cook’s study which was published around the 15th of this month.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article

As one who hates statistics but whose work forced statistical analysis for 29 years, I think a brief analysis using Cook’s metrics of the 11,944 articles (I’ll round up to 12,000) to the final analyitic that 97% of scientists agree about anthropogenic global warming (AGW). I’ve copied Cook’s metric abstract and the link to his study below but let me play a bit mathmatecially.

---

Initially a huge number (12,000) peer reviewed articles containing the words “global warming” or “global climate change” were reviewed.

1. For simplification may I say 12,000 scients were analyized?

2. ok…of those 12,000 scientists, 66.4% expressed NO opinion at all about AGW. So we subtract 66% from the original 12,000 scientists (66% of 12,000 = 7,680) thus from 12,000 – 7,680 scientisis we now have 4,320 left. Hmmm 97%? But lets continue…

3. You see that Cook himself says of the 12,000 scientists, 32.6% endordes AGW in some way. Rounding up to 33% of 12,000 would equal 3,960 scientists of the original 12,000 endorsed AGW.

4. Let’s round the 3,960 up to 4,000 scientists from the original 12,000 who agree with AGW. Can you do the math to figure what % 4,000 is of 12,000? Is it 97%? Is it closer to a third, perhaps?

If interested you may read on for how he get to his statement that 97% agree on AGW…

5. Just because Mother Jones is a far left mag (which I like a lot actuially) it is important to know that both sides of all the numerous sides of this issue play with stats. Because they are honest they do provide the math but its easy for papers to tout 97%! WoW!! How many people actually read the fine print?

6. I have actually been accused of being Troll-ish just because I do not think CO2 has anything to do with global temp. The majority here seem to be snug and set in thier belief that is does. This astounds me, but hey, I do agree there is an anthropogenic effect on climate temp. both higher and lower at variouys times and in various places. I do think the climate does change as it always has and do not disagree with

7. I can think of 4 or 5 other ways to analyize this studies stats so am interested if any of you can state your case.

---

Ok here is the abstract followed by the link to Cook’s report:

---

Abstract:

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article

---

Perhaps next we could parce the science behind and numerous ways CO2 is quantified from the past and even today…such as the scare piece from Hawaii recently. It’s amazing. but I’ll probably get bitch slapped and scorned waaaaay too much prior to finding a moind who will parce it out bit by bit.

[ZOne]

1. waterworld ~ Thank you for so intelligently and calmly clarifying the primary point I so feebly was attempting to get across. Your last paragraph is brilliant IMHO: (neutrality is indeed key)

Last Paragraph of waterworld:

“I totally agree with those of you who say there is nothing wrong with enforcing the IRS rules and that in fact there should be more enforcement of the 501(c)(4) rules to exclude any fundamentally political organizations that are seeking tax exempt status. But we really must insist that the IRS exercise its powers neutrally. There’s nothing neutral about singling out just one type of group or organization for enforcement actions, even if the groups the IRS selected deserved the attention.”

2. I haven’t noticed any discussion from any of you being aware of epically rare fact that the IRS issued a Letter of Apology, admitted “…it was AN ERROR IN JUDGMENT” to target groups with “Tea Party, “Patriot” for extra scrutiny”.

That problem was compounded when examiners asked more intrusive questions in what’s known as a “development” process. “Some of the development letters that were send were far too broad and include things like asking for the organization’s DONOR LIST, which is not generally what we do,” Lerner said.

These groups were also asked to produce their Facebook and Twitter pages…Good Grief!

There were hundreds of articles on this rare event but here are a couple:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/10/irs-apology-conservative-groups-2012-election/2149939/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324787004578495412169443502.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/10/irs-apology_n_3253001.html

3. Also rare and of note to why this issue is serious: The head of this IRS group who targeted possible conservative groups TOOK THE FIFTH and refused to testify:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/22/politics/irs-targeting/index.html

And was placed on “administrative leave”.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57585938/irs-official-lois-lerner-placed-on-leave/

---

Thankfully, even though WC and others think this action warranted and worthy, most CITIZENS recognize as abuse of power

---

As to the poem, I used the original version in hopes that it would be of interest as the derivation of the many more modern modifications and not to equate the IRS with NaziS…Duh! The point of the poem remains the slippery slope to unwarranted abuse of human rights which will inevitably occur that if you say nothing about abuse toward groups or individuals who are targeted just because you disagree with the group or you are not a member of that particular group. Someday you will be a member of a targeted group. Best to insist that TPTB neutrally enforce ~ FORCE.

[WorldCitizen]

(Being a troll is easy)

All joking aside. Being targeted by the IRS is never a happy day for anyone. However, it seems to me the targeting of groups with the words “Tea Prty” or “Patriot” in the name is not as an egregious violation of rights; rather a reasonable red flag to follow toward tax violations. I’m sure since I’m no tax attorney, I’m probably oversimplifying this, but how is the IRS looking for red flags violating anyone?

As a reference, I’ve included below the 501(C)(4) information from it’s Wiki page:

“501(c)(4) organizations are generally civic leagues and other corporations operated exclusively for the promotion of “social welfare”, such as civics and civics issues, or local associations of employees with membership limited to a designated company or people in a particular municipality or neighborhood, and with net earnings devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.[35] An organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.[36]

501(c)(4) organizations may inform the public on controversial subjects and attempt to influence legislation relevant to its program[37] and, unlike 501(c)(3) organizations, they may also participate in political campaigns and elections, as long as its primary activity is the promotion of social welfare.[38] The tax exemption for 501(c)(4) organizations applies to most of their operations, but contributions may be subject to gift tax, and income spent on political activities – generally the advocacy of a particular candidate in an election – is taxable.[39] 501(c)(4) organizations are not permitted direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office.[36]

Contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations are usually not deductible as charitable contributions for U.S. federal income tax, with a few exceptions.[40] 501(c)(4) organizations are not required to disclose their donors publicly.[41]

The lack of disclosure has led to extensive use of the 501(c)(4) provisions for organizations that are actively involved in lobbying, and has become controversial.[42][43] Criticized as “dark money,” spending from these organizations on political TV ads has exceeded spending from Super PACs.[44][45]

The law allows Section 501(c)(4) organizations to self-declare and hold themselves out as tax-exempt; they do not have to obtain any approval from the Internal Revenue Service, though they may.[46]

The origins of 501(c)(4) organizations date back to the Revenue Act of 1913, which created a new group of tax-exempt organizations dedicated to social welfare in a precursor to what is now Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(4).[47]”

If anything, I would hope the outrage is that MORE political groups looking for tax exempt status and the exemption from disclosing their donors SHOULD be targeted. Private money seems to be the enemy of politics. Let’s give them all some shit for a change.

[smokeycretin9]

http://www.buy-pepper-spray-today.com/images/detailed/0/Bear_Spray13387377944fcb848231063.jpg

just sayin’