Page 1 of 52
Posted on December 18 at 7:56 p.m.
So Ken Volok, you are petroleum geologist. I expect to see your paper published in one of the peer reviewed journals any day now. There are things that are matters of opinion (like my comments) and things that matters of fact (like yours). Matters of fact are subject to scientific verification. Otherwise, they are simply worthless utterances to be deposited in dust bins and forgotten.
On Goleta City Council Talks Ellwood Oil
Posted on December 18 at 4:22 p.m.
No head scratching necessary. Aceves did not want to have a vote on this issue because a majority of Goleta residents would prefer that Venoco (and Bacara) simply disappear. Permitting 421 will extend Venoco's vested rights in the Ellwood facility. Aceves is running for 2nd District Supervisor and needs all the conservatives to vote for him in order to win. Consequently, he can't take a position against oil development. On the other hand, he cannot win with only the conservative vote, so he needs some moderate and liberal votes as well. The moderates and liberals are not all that enamored with Venoco, so Aceves cannot come out as pro-oil. It was much better for him that the item was placed on the agenda in a such a manner to allow him to sit up there on the dias like a Zen monk contemplating the sound of one hand clapping. Ah, Santa Barbara politics, isn't it pretty to watch?
Posted on December 17 at 7:53 p.m.
Please don't give me the "slower traffic keep right" B.S. I drive to Ventura from the Santa Barbara area at least once every week of the year. What I see every time (not just sometimes, but every time!) are slow moving trucks hanging out in the center lane, like boulders in stream, because they do not want to deal with merging traffic. This is a major cause of congestion as other drivers attempt to flow around the boulders (i.e., slow moving trucks). By the time you get to Montecito, the trucks are in all three lanes and the average speed is below 60 mph, even on good days. In all my travels south (which in the last 40 years have added up to thousands), I have never seen a problem with the left hand exits. Still, I am willing to admit that such evidence is only anecdotal and will accept real, scientifically collected and analyzed data to determine the safety of the exits. I suspect that if Caltrans had the data we would have seen it by now.
On Jerry Brown Now Directly Involved in Highway Widening Dispute?
Posted on November 25 at 1:03 p.m.
Well Foofighter, I don't believe that we are dealing with any difficult moral ambiguities here. If a person makes a promise of marital fidelity and then breaks that promise then the person is a liar and a promise-breaker. I don't know any system of ethics in which that would pass muster as a moral act. Secondly, with regard to job performance, people in superior employment relationships are not supposed to engage in romantic pursuits of their subordinates. That comes right of supervision 101 and every workplace policy manual I ever saw. If these were two single deputies who had an affair that went bad, I would shrug it off as poor judgment and romance and not make the severe judgments that I did on these posts. But this circumstance is very different from simply a romantic entanglement that went bad.
On Undersheriff Jim Peterson Retired Amid 'Sexting' Scandal
Posted on November 24 at 1:17 p.m.
Walston is not an innocent in all this. She appears to be just as immoral, narcissistic, and stupid as Peterson. However, Peterson being in the superior position in the employment relationship holds more responsibility for proper behavior under the law. As a career law enforcement officer, he should have known that. And Foofighter, regardless of how well or how poorly Peterson did other aspects of his job, someone who would cheat on his or her spouse and violate internal policies regarding sexual harassment, has neither the moral fiber nor the discipline to follow the law that should be required of any and all law enforcement officers.
Posted on November 23 at 10:56 a.m.
The most troubling thing to me about this is how a man with such a debased and flawed moral character, incredibly bad judgment, and obvious sub-par level of intelligence got into such a high position in law enforcement. We are in trouble as a society if we are relying on intellectually impaired narcissistic sociopaths to protect us from the intellectually impaired narcissistic sociopaths.
Posted on November 21 at 1:32 p.m.
Well foofighter, as a South County resident I say, go for it and then live with consequences of cutting off their noses to spite their faces. When the North County had a 3-2 majority on the Board, they enacted all kinds of stuff against the wishes of the majority of South County residents, so their complaints, now that the shoe is on the other foot, seem disingenuous to me. Also, Lavagnino is correct that the vast majority of the property taxes generated in this County come from the southern half of it. The split off North County would start life in a deep financial hole. I don't believe that splitting is the answer. Lavagnino and Adam need to reach out to the other supervisors and build consensus and coalition through compromise instead of making ideological speeches on the dais for the benefit of TV audiences.
On Considering a County Split
Posted on November 16 at 8:14 p.m.
Foo, I am not convinced that science means anything to you, but you should check out this link if it does: http://www.sbcapcd.org/apcd/pub-healt...The science indicates that children and elderly folks should not live near any road with high volumes of traffic. In fact children who live near roads with high volumes of traffic can experience permanent diminished lung capacity. Do you really think we should ignore that kind data just to protect someone's rights to develop their property?
On Development Near Freeway to be Curbed
Posted on November 16 at 8:04 p.m.
Well Greenspan, either the data (as in scientifically gathered and analyzed facts) supports the danger of left hand off ramps or not. It has nothing to do with what we think (or what "any fool" thinks). It is all about the science. I for one have never experienced a problem driving past those off ramps and I do so at least once a week and have done so for over 40 years. Yet my anecdotal evidence is not science. If Caltrans has the science, let them share it. As far as Carbajal and Schneider's pandering to voters: I like politicians who pander to voters. That tells me that they are not dictators. They listen to the people who voted them into office. That is not a bad thing. If we wanted an all-knowing leader who patted us on the head and said, "there, there," we would have kings and queens, which we don't want. This is not a meaningless stunt. There are tens of millions of dollars and environmental and aesthetic effects at stake. Caltrans needs to either support their case with science or fold their cards and get on with the project.
On Way More Heat than Light on 101
Posted on November 16 at 9:50 a.m.
Foo, there is plenty of scientific evidence that living next to freeways and other roads with large amounts of traffic is bad for your health. In fact, the evidence shows that there are effects as far away as 1500 feet. But from my understanding, it appears as if the greatest effects are within the 500 foot buffer recommended by the California Air Resources Board. You are correct however that there is absolutely no evidence that sound walls or trees will mitigate the health effects of the traffic. That part is just the City staff trying to cut the baby in half. The whole point of that Biblical story is that nobody wins when you cut the baby in half and those who accept the bifurcation are usually just interested in everybody losing rather than anybody winning. Why don't bureaucrats ever seem to get that point?
Artamo Gallery will present new works by Francoise Issaly and ... Read More
Previous Month | Next Month