Virginia Wolfe (Scheffer)

Thank you to all those that have put on these reunions.  I have truely enjoyed them and hope to go to more in the future wherever they may be.  Beer and pretzels are just fine! To me, it's all about going back a few years to our younger days.  Great memories for all.  Sadly we have lost too many along the way. May they all rest in peace.  Let's try to keep these memories going!  

Lynn Britton

I agree with everyone else.  Gary thank you for your work and I also am willing to help with your out of pocket if it gets to that.  Maybe we should go back to the Cove in the future like we did a few reunions ago.  I'm guessing it would be a lot less $$$.  It was a great success last time.  Lynn

Ronald Goodmansen

I am a maybe for this reunion but I surely will contribute to fund it.

Lynn Britton

Steve Morris, Angelo's needs you to call them about the get together.  You can add my wife and I to the attendees.  Lynn 

Al Peffley

Gary, I think you have done a great effort at making these reunions a success in the past. I hope I did not come across as being ungrateful for your heart-felt dedication to organizing HHS reunions. My point on cost was not the cost of tickets to the attendees but the up-front money you are required to come up with for reserving a large hotel facility location along with a buffet dinner and open bar. I have also planned and helped manage several events at the SEATAC Red Lion for non-profit organizations. I also know that last-minute attendees may not get dinner, but will still have to pay a basic entry fee to cover the contract commitments with the host facility.

For-profit organization sponsored events are a business expense write-off to the sponsoring organization, and all big hotel chains create contracts mostly based on selling commercial business events. Therefore, many hotels require the same expensive down-payment requirements to a non-profit. That puts a bigger liability burden on you if you signed the standard contract. I think from the comments posted here that the attendees and some others who cannot attend will help you out with added expenses that you have already committed to for this event. Keep us informed.

The number of attendees in the future will continue to lessen mostly due to classmate deaths, more frequent family summer vacations with children & grandchildren, and diminishing health issues. If you can find a meeting hall near a motel or a smaller hotel convention center like the Shilo Inn offers that will help you arrange catering by a pre-paid meal agreement (with an ordering cut-off date) instead of an open buffet, then down payment and up-front costs should come down. I understand why you wanted to be near the airport but, you should not have to assume a $2,700 liability on this type of social event. Prearranged Uber, Lyft and airport shuttles for use by people flying in are good options.

I think all of us who are still alive and kicking will help out in some way on this reunion expense and future ones. We just need a little more advanced information about the facility contract commitments, final attendee count fluctuation options (to much or not enough food can be an pesky issue), and maybe establishing some type of reserve fund to donate to for future event down payments.

Just some thoughts...

Ruth Scholtes (Murphy)

I also want to thank Gary for all  the work he is doing  and has done for us. I will be sending a donation to the address on the web site .I will not be attending but wish  you all a great time this weekend. Cheers . Ruth Scholtes Murphy

Theron Wood

Al Peffley

Gary sent an email out today saying the Catering Manager at the hotel allowed him to reduce the expected head count down from 140 planned to 100 guests for the meal and bar. THAT IS GOOD NEWS. Now let's hope that we have more attendees paying at the door. He still may need a little help from us after Saturday.

Linda Pompeo (Worden)

Thank you Steve and Gary for a most enjoyable Friday night get-together.

Steve Morris

Had a great time at the 55 reunion events.  Loved seeing everyone and hope you enjoyed it as well. Seeing the 110 or so folks on the memorial boards was sad. I miss some of them. That's out of what we guessed was 660 or so classmates. Thanks to Gary and Bill and Carolyn for their efforts! See you at the next one!! (I hope - ha!)

Steve Morris

upthetower@aol.com

206-890-4188

Linda Pompeo (Worden)

A big thank you to all that were involved in planning and organizing our 55th reunion.  It was wonderful to see everyone that attended and wish that more had been able to come. 

The 'In Memory' board was a reminder of how temporary and how blessed we are.  So many were gone way too soon.

Again, than you to all that made this reunion possible.  

Gary Lindberg

Wish I could have been there to see all of you. The death of my little sister and two memorial services kept me away. To all.................be safe and well..............Gary

Linda Pompeo (Worden)

Gary,

My heartfelt condolences to  you and your family.  It is so very hard to lose a family member.  May you be filled with all of the good memories of the time you were able to spend with your sister.  

Blessings to you and your family as you go through this difficult time.

Be well and we will all plan on seeing  you at the next reunion.

Gary Lindberg

Thank you Linda. Your words so touched my heart. She was my little sister and I loved her so very much. God bless you my dear.

Jack Fouts

Gary, so very sorry for your loss. You and your family will be in our prayers.

Jack Fouts

Gary Lindberg

Thank you Jack. Miss seeing you buddy! God Bless and be safe and well! .......Gary

Gregg Wilson

When science and politics lie down together, only politics gets up.

An example:

This is the Earth's overall climate temperature for the past 4,500 years. If you wish to attribute this to carbon dioxide - good luck!

Carbon dioxide, with oxygen, are the components of the overall cycle of life. The main feedstocks of plant life are water and carbon dioxide. They give off oxygen. The primary ingredients for animal life are plants and oxygen.

The Al Gore crazies want to stop the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Great. That brings all plant life to a halt, and therefore, all animal life to a halt. The carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is 350 to 400 parts per million - a very little amount.

Sermon over.

Al Peffley

Gregg,

I saw this graphic chart included in an excellent YouTube video on explaining climate change. We "little speck" humans are so egotistical that we think we can control the universe as we know it and all effects of solestial and astrophysical influences on our earth home. These days it seems like political "Chicken Little's" like Al Gore are a dime a dozen (or cheaper.) That is not to say we should not recycle materials or be good environmental stewards of what we can physically control in our local neighborhoods -- that is responsible living that should not be dictated by the global elite or global politicians with hidden population control agendas.

I was originally a science major in college (Oceanography type) and have a associate of science degree specializing in Marine Biology (my minor, because I finished with a BS in technology Business Administration.) I can remember this push for one-world order government and population control being introduced at many colleges during the Vietnam War time period. It is too bad that our public and private higher education school systems seem to have failed miserably in teaching many adults today some basic scientific principles and laws of physics, biology, geology, atmospheric studies, and chemistry. The information is out there on the Internet to study and think about for useful application (and so is the "tinfoil hat", politically-promoted propaganda.) Most folks won't spend a little time to learn or relearn what they may have forgotten from their science classes. The truth shall set you free!

Semper Fi.

Robert Bramel

That's quite a chart by Cliff Harris (no identified college degree, no identified relevant research or scientific credentials) and Randy Mann (BS Cal State, no identified research or credentials). They are definitely publicity hounds. The chart looks impressive with all the tidbits, but is hardly scientific. (Although you've got to admit that the slope of the curve leading to 2017 is far and away steeper than any other slope-- strongly suggesting a new phenomenon.)There are excellent science books based on real research; dive into the weeds and understand how ice cores and ocean sediments are studied and intrepreted, and the what those studies really tell us about human impact.

Oh well...

John Bartkowski

There's a great book out by one of the original founders of Greenpeace, entitled Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout, the making of a sensible environmentalist, by Patrick Moore (no relation to Michael). I agree with his statement that "environmentalism should be based squarely on science and logic. This includes an objective appriasal of economics,such s recognizing that solare energy costs up to ten times as much as conventional energy and that the sun doesn't shine at night. We must recognize we depend absolutely on the resources of the earth for our survival. Teh tendency of pop environmentalists to oppose every single mining development anywhere provides a clear example of abandonment of science and logic.  We can't survive on mines because the minerals, metals and fuels derived from them are absoltely essential. Have these people give up cell phones, laptops, and bicycles? Of course we must work to make our mines compatable with the sustainability of the environment." It's a good read and a wonderful resource, however, if you don't want to shell out your hard earned money for the book, look him up on Youtube.  I agree, we must do our level best to take care of the environment and remember all too well, while serving in the Navy off the coast of Vietnam, that the garbage barge would come alongside our ship and take our trash out to sea and dump it.  Even back then, I thought this is not good.  I would imagine that such practices are no longer in effect today.  One can only hope.                               Respectfully - John Bartkowski

Gregg Wilson

Hi Bob,

Are you contesting their credentials or the facts? Since 0 AD, the warm and cold periods are well established facts. During cold periods there was a failure of crops, famine, wide spead diseases, massive death and failure of civilizations. During warm periods, crops were plentiful, no famine, and an increase of population and no apparent failure of civilizations.

In reality, the warm periods were normal and the cold periods were abnormal - the cold period most likely caused by volcanic eruptions. The carbon dioxide in the atmosphere promotes plant growth but is far too little to raise the atmosphere's temperature.

I spent 51 years in cleaning water and air, so I have some experience in the effects of pollution. We have a great many coaled fired and oil fired power plants. The flue gas releases sulfure dioxide, hydrogen fluoride, some nitric oxides and particulates into the atmosphere. However, flue gas scrubbers (at all American plants) remove these pollutants by using metal carbonates and water. This, of course, releases carbon dioxide and water into the atmosphere. The horror!

A consensus of scientists does not determine reality.

Tom Chavez

Regarding carbon dioxide, YouTube is not a reliable authority. Anyone can post anything there. Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego or NASA would be more reliably scientific. 

From NASA: Ancient air bubbles trapped in ice enable us to step back in time and see what Earth's atmosphere, and climate, were like in the distant past. They tell us that levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere are higher than they have been at any time in the past 400,000 years. During ice ages, CO2 levels were around 200 parts per million (ppm), and during the warmer interglacial periods, they hovered around 280 ppm (see fluctuations in the graph). In 2013, CO2 levels surpassed 400 ppm for the first time in recorded history. This recent relentless rise in CO2 shows a remarkably constant relationship with fossil-fuel burning, and can be well accounted for based on the simple premise that about 60 percent of fossil-fuel emissions stay in the air.

Reference: https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/24/graphic-the-relentless-rise-of-carbon-dioxide/

Above is a daily record of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego. The Scripps CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa have been supported for many years by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and have more recently been supplemented by Earth Networks, a technology company that is collaborating with Scripps to expand the global GHG monitoring network. Support for website development was provided in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.

Reference: https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

Robert Bramel

Gregg, good science requires sourcing and peer review, and the picture provides neither. Harris and Mann drew a picture and stuck in a whole lot of extraneous information presumably hoping that the inexperienced viewer would be impressed by the sheer volume of information. How the literally hundreds of bits of info relate to anything is left to the reader’s imagination — that’s not how science works. Notably they left out the vertical axis: we can assume that it is a temperature scale  and that it is intended to be linear—but we simply don’t know. The smoothness of the curves suggests it is free handed between the few dots and not reflective of reality, What is the source of the dot information? Then again, given that these two individuals are without expertise and they have referenced no sources it is not possible to check anything about how they created this. Whether the graph even approximates reality would require starting independently. 

Their considerable bias is evident in a number of ways. Why did they pick this particular time frame when data is available for literally hundreds of thousands of years? It “just happens to have an origin in both axes at the birth of Christ— why? Why did the pick those four items to place in text boxes? Why did they pick the particular historical bits to add; the majority contribute nothing to a discussion of climate. Are the irrelevant biblical references a not-so-subtle attempt at buy-in from like minded readers?

With a lifetime of creating and utilizing graphical data in my profession I can confidently say that a presentation of this caliber would not be acceptable; it would be dismissed as an amateurish cartoon. If these two had a truly important message they should have been able to put together a tight, well-sourced, peer-reviewed paper. They did not.

Al Peffley

Interesting dialogue that you started, Gregg. If you watch the YouTube video that Cliff posted you will hear him reference his scientific data sources. He is apparently an educated Climatologist subject matter expert, but may not have a "Piled High and Deeper" degree (LOL). It amazes me that Bill Gates does not have any college degree but is viewed as some sort of technical and social academic genius on many subject matters.

Al Gore is a snake oil salesman politician that benefits from expensive fees to speak about things he is also not a climate subject matter expert on (neither am I.) My point is that "interpretations" are simply that, premises, not proven laws of science. They are not proven facts from validated and verified physical event observations but deduced ideas that may be true or not true. The real point is that we, as beings of the "human race" (the only race of people), should take good care of what God has created for us. We should also genuinely care about each other's health and well being while we are here on this beautiful, evolving earth. Selling credit "wavers" to acid-spewing power plants like the Clinton Admanistration did, does not solve the problem. It just kicks the environmental improvement can down the road. The EPA is a political control tool, not a servant of We the People nor a scientific knowledge base of useful information most of the time. I worked for NASA for years on many space programs. NASA can also be politcally-motivated to come up with the "right answer" for its masters in the Administration and Congress.

I worked on power satellite systems at Boeing. The solar cell technology and energy power storage capability options are too immature to yield the output power results that would replace fossil fuels. Spent lithium batteries are toxic materials. Arsenic doping of efficienct solar cells produces toxic waste byproducts. Power wind mills kill many species of birds and bats, and most proponents like Seattle will not pay the higher price of the windmill power output that they dictate be produced. Power component improvements don't scale like digital components. This is reality, not political propaganda being spewed out in AOC's "Green New Deal". If we all drove only electric cars at the number of vehicles we have today and use electric power for manufacturing and residential uses at current levels, then we would take down today's national power grid capabilty. A blend of energy source uses is a good start to clean air, but not total replacement at the cost of immobility. Methanol is the fuel of the future for fuel cell powered cars that output pure water, not solar cells. Solar cells are great for residential living off of "the grid", but government wants you to buy power from them so that they can collect the taxes and fees to fund the massive government controls machine -- follow the money.

I don't want to live in a Sustainable Development "Megacity" if garbage and drug infested SanFrancisco, "Portlandia", and Seattle are the NWO prototype role models. More and more I desire to live off the political and self-perpetuating socialist (commuist-inspired) grid in Eastern Oregon with minimal power usage and common sense ranchers and farmers for my remaining years here on planet earth; not perfect, but sufficient.

The debate is good. It brought out a lot of discussion that should bring light to what is true and/or relevant to responsible living for our remaining years here on earth. I enjoyed the discussion.

Best Regards,

Al

Robert Brownlow

Your points are well taken, Bob.  I agree with your underlying premise.