Finally a real storm in Southern California -- thank whatever gods may be!

Dragged empty trash can to front porch where it will fill up quickly.


Garden is always is visibly relieved to "drink" pure sky water by contrast with imported, treated water.

Not that I'm knocking treated water. Without it, this would be a desert.
And may be again if we don't get enough precipitation to end the drought.

Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.

HB

Higgs Boson wrote:

Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just
off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination
technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.

HB

Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not that the
later seems to bother too many.

D

On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long, well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at what's been happening in the Middle East. As always, Israel has been a forward-thinking leader. When you're a tiny blip on the map, surrounded by neighbors that have been trying to kill you long before you officially became a country, you HAVE to devote resources to survival. One of many Web sites devoted to Israeli irrigation, water usage, and desalination:

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059994202

This research has long been shared with Big Brother, aka the U.S. but until recent years, the full effect of global warming has not been felt by the average US person, who is focussed more on the next electronic toy than on the price/supply of water.

HB

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source your
power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.


D

Todd wrote:
On 02/28/2014 04:57 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott
wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you
source your power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding
the problem.


D


Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.

What a ridiculous reaction.

D

Todd writes:

On 02/28/2014 04:57 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:

Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just
off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination
technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.

HB

Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the
later seems to bother too many.

D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source
your power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.


D

Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.

Those plastic bottles are a hazard.

What makes you think that bottled water wasn't sewage a little while
ago?

There's very little new water being made on this planet.

--
Dan Espen

On 2/28/2014 6:45 PM, Todd wrote:
On 02/28/2014 04:57 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source
your power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.


D


Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.


In the community where I live and adjacent communities, parks, golf
courses, school playgrounds, and greenbelts are irrigated with
"reclaimed" water. The water is the output of our local sewage plant.
Even though some of the irrigation systems spray the reclaimed water
into the air, it is still considered safe for human contact.

In Los Angeles, the Japanese Garden in the Sepulveda Basin is irrigated
by the output of the Tillman Water Reclamation Plant (a sewage plant).
Actually, the garden is over-watered. The excess seeps into the aquifer
that underlies the Los Angeles River. While the river itself is often
little more than a trickle, the underlying aquifer supplies about 10% of
the city's drinking water. Given what residents of the city dump into
the streets, the reclaimed water is likely better than the river flow.
After a rain storm, swimmers and surfers are warned to stay out of the
ocean near the river's mouth and near the mouths of other water courses
along the coast.

--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
http://www.rossde.com/garden/climate.html
Gardening diary at http://www.rossde.com/garden/diary

Dan Espen wrote:

Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.

Those plastic bottles are a hazard.

What makes you think that bottled water wasn't sewage a little while
ago?

There's very little new water being made on this planet.

Every drop of water has been recycled through many processes and systems
over the eons. The drink in front of you probably contains some water that
was in a dinosaur, some that was a grub and some that was urine or faeces of
other creatures. Shortening the cycle so that we can re-use water quicker
and cheaper often promotes this gut reaction of revulsion as a first
response, which is understandable. The fact that so many never get beyond
the gut reaction and begin to think about it is not so understandable.

I seem to recall that the troglodytes prevailed despite a public education
campaign and this scheme never went into production.

D

David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
....
Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source your
power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.

the basic problem is that we've gotten into the
habit of mixing human waste with potable water to
begin with. this compounds many other problems and
they tag along with the whole process. clean up
the basic misconception and you get many benefits
in result. not having to build nuclear
desalinization plants would be one of them (who
needs more chances at Fukushima? are you seriously
considering more nuclear plants in California?
are you really that idiotic? yes, i am seriously
calling you an idiot if you are building more
nuclear plants in that area).

much of the use of water is simply to flush waste
materials away.

when you consider how much energy it takes to pump
and clean the water again after it is used as a waste
transport system then perhaps you'll understand the
sheer stupidity of this whole system.

most human waste is valueable and can be composted
safely without having to use all that water.

the waste which is not safely compostable (hormone
treatments, some drugs, chemotherapeutics and nuclear
medicine) should be treated differently, but those
people who know they are doing such things could be
set up with their medical providers to have a clean
disposal path for their waste (so that it does not
become a hazard to others).

in a world of limited resources there is no excuse
for not recycling of most materials. for areas with
limited water they certainly should not be wasting
water by using it as a waste transport mechanism.

you do not need or want more nuclear plants. there
are viable methods that can be used right now without
nuclear energy. please don't support methods which
potentially can kill/pollute everyone downwind or
downstream.


songbird

songbird wrote:
the basic problem is that we've gotten into the
habit of mixing human waste with potable water to
begin with.

No.

this compounds many other problems and
they tag along with the whole process. clean up
the basic misconception and you get many benefits
in result. not having to build nuclear
desalinization plants would be one of them (who
needs more chances at Fukushima? are you seriously
considering more nuclear plants in California?
are you really that idiotic? yes, i am seriously
calling you an idiot if you are building more
nuclear plants in that area).


An emotive side issue.

much of the use of water is simply to flush waste
materials away

It's true some water is used to flush but you still need to have a sewerage
system in cities. If using dual flush toilets and only hitting the button
when required the use on toilet flushing is not that high. There are only
small savings there. Domestically, washing and showering use much more.
Gardens, golf courses, pools, fountains, hosing the driveway etc use
astronomically more.


when you consider how much energy it takes to pump
and clean the water again after it is used as a waste
transport system then perhaps you'll understand the
sheer stupidity of this whole system.

most human waste is valueable and can be composted
safely without having to use all that water.


Composting toilets are fashionable round here. They smell in normal
operation and are a bitch to clean out, someone has to go in and dig them
out. You can't pay someone enough to do it. They are suitable for deserts
not cities. In high humidty areas they stay too wet. But you still need to
have water reticulation and sewerage networks. Flushing with grey water is
more practical.

the waste which is not safely compostable (hormone
treatments, some drugs, chemotherapeutics and nuclear
medicine) should be treated differently, but those
people who know they are doing such things could be
set up with their medical providers to have a clean
disposal path for their waste (so that it does not
become a hazard to others).


Yes if the whole family is healthy compost it otherwise cart your shit to a
waste centre if any one of you are taking pills. Or have a honey pot
collection. Can you imagine this system in a big city. In the 19th century
before the sewer was built London was called "the great wen" Get serious.

in a world of limited resources there is no excuse
for not recycling of most materials. for areas with
limited water they certainly should not be wasting
water by using it as a waste transport mechanism.


Most of the water in the sewer is not from flushing.

Bird you haven't thought this out.

D

On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:45:06 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 02/28/2014 04:57 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source
your power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.


D


Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.

Every drop of water on this planet is the same as was here at its
creation, not a drop more or less... your bottled water is the same
water the dinosaurs ****ed.

On Friday, February 28, 2014 10:26:56 PM UTC-8, songbird wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:

Higgs Boson wrote:

...

Uh, let's look at those factors:



Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here

on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for

nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected

states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen

told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true

as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to

listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,

well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other

constituents of global warming.



Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at

what's been happening in the Middle East.

(removed by previous poster: detail of working scalable desalination in the one democracy in the Middle East)



The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source your

power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.



the basic problem is that we've gotten into the

habit of mixing human waste with potable water to

begin with. this compounds many other problems and

they tag along with the whole process. clean up

the basic misconception and you get many benefits

in result. not having to build nuclear

desalinization plants would be one of them (who

needs more chances at Fukushima? are you seriously

considering more nuclear plants in California?

are you really that idiotic? yes, i am seriously

calling you an idiot if you are building more

nuclear plants in that area).

Songie, before you gallop away on your apocalyptic anti-nuclear horse, allow this "idiot" to point out that "Manhattan Project" only referred to a national effort -- in WW II, to create an atomic bomb. Not something this "idiot" approved of, much less appreciated incinerating two cities full of civilians.

I have seen several films, both American and Japanese, which documented in chilling detail the utter chaos -- political and military -- that reigned inside the Japanese Government after Hiroshima and before Nagasaki. It is useful to make some effort to acquaint oneself with the FACTS.

The US was not only ignorant of the situation inside Japan, but didn't condescend to investigate it. We only blindly insisted on the military mantra of "unconditional surrender". If our ultimatum had been couched with SOME understanding of what was going on -- don't tell me sources weren't available!! -- like not humiliating their Emperor-God -- hundreds of thousands more lives could have been spared, not to mention future generations affected by radiation.

As we know, after surrender, the U.S. turned over Japan to big business, which basically ran the country until some stirrings of democracy began to be felt.

How many are aware that dropping the bombs had little to do with forestalling a putative land invasion of Japan? They were on their asses already; no fuel, no food, no nuthin'. Ththere would have been relatively little resistance even by suicide, once the Emperor said give up.

Our GIs were told that dropping the bomb saved them from heavy casualties in a putative invasion. If I'd been a grunt at that time, believe me, I would have believed it!

What they, and the American people, were never told was that the bomb was rushed into production to hasten surrender before the Soviet Union could take part in the fighting, per their wartime agreement with the Allies. The last thing the US wanted was them Commie pinkos getting their toes into Japan -- or anywhere else. Never mind a few million "Japs" getting toasted, between the Tokyo firebombing (see also Dresden) and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Years ago, I made a pilgrimage to Hiroshima to bow at the memorial of those innocents killed at 8:15 a.m.,just as the streets were full of children on their way to school.

Boys with their toys...

The point made by this "idiot" is that a full-scale national effort was behind the Bomb.

A similar full-scale effort to investigate and perfect scalable desalinization
is not only do-able, but of the utmost urgency.

HB (aka "the idiot"
[...]

On 03/01/2014 11:25 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:
How many are aware that dropping the bombs had little to do with forestalling a putative land invasion of Japan? They were on their asses already; no fuel, no food, no nuthin'. Ththere would have been relatively little resistance even by suicide, once the Emperor said give up.

Our GIs were told that dropping the bomb saved them from heavy casualties in a putative invasion. If I'd been a grunt at that time, believe me, I would have believed it!

Hi Higgs,

My late mother-in-law worked on the Manhattan project. Everyone on
that project was HORRIFIED with what they were about to do. And, if
anyone tells you they were not aware of the situation in Japan, they
are lying to you. The decision was made based on the Japanese military
arming the civilian population -- women, children -- with wooden
knives to fight us hand to hand. They were not going to give up.
And it took two bombs, not one, before they did.

And the death count from those two bombs was actually lower than
the death count from our fire bomb attacks, which suffocated
thousands.

Have you read the prisoner counts from those islands we invaded
in the Pacific? 10, 14? We had to run soldiers over who where
out of ammunition with our tanks. They were fighting us with their
hands. This was the Japan we were about to invade.

A lot of people hate America. They spread a lot of b--- s---
around about us. We are not with out our problems. What makes
us different is that we do work on them.

-T

On 3/1/2014 11:25 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:
Songie, before you gallop away on your apocalyptic anti-nuclear
horse, allow this "idiot" to point out that "Manhattan Project" only
referred to a national effort -- in WW II, to create an atomic bomb.
Not something this "idiot" approved of, much less appreciated
incinerating two cities full of civilians.

I have seen several films, both American and Japanese, which
documented in chilling detail the utter chaos -- political and
military -- that reigned inside the Japanese Government after
Hiroshima and before Nagasaki. It is useful to make some effort to
acquaint oneself with the FACTS.

The US was not only ignorant of the situation inside Japan, but
didn't condescend to investigate it. We only blindly insisted on the
military mantra of "unconditional surrender". If our ultimatum had
been couched with SOME understanding of what was going on -- don't
tell me sources weren't available!! -- like not humiliating their
Emperor-God -- hundreds of thousands more lives could have been
spared, not to mention future generations affected by radiation.

As we know, after surrender, the U.S. turned over Japan to big
business, which basically ran the country until some stirrings of
democracy began to be felt.

How many are aware that dropping the bombs had little to do with
forestalling a putative land invasion of Japan? They were on their
asses already; no fuel, no food, no nuthin'. Ththere would have been
relatively little resistance even by suicide, once the Emperor said
give up.

Our GIs were told that dropping the bomb saved them from heavy
casualties in a putative invasion. If I'd been a grunt at that time,
believe me, I would have believed it!

What they, and the American people, were never told was that the bomb
was rushed into production to hasten surrender before the Soviet
Union could take part in the fighting, per their wartime agreement
with the Allies. The last thing the US wanted was them Commie pinkos
getting their toes into Japan -- or anywhere else. Never mind a few
million "Japs" getting toasted, between the Tokyo firebombing (see
also Dresden) and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Years ago, I made a pilgrimage to Hiroshima to bow at the memorial of
those innocents killed at 8:15 a.m.,just as the streets were full of
children on their way to school.

Boys with their toys...

The point made by this "idiot" is that a full-scale national effort
was behind the Bomb.

A similar full-scale effort to investigate and perfect scalable
desalinization is not only do-able, but of the utmost urgency.

HB (aka "the idiot" [...]

I believe the horror caused by the two bombs dropped in Japan (very
shortly after my 4th birthday) has prevented any nation from again using
any kind of nuclear weapon.

--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
http://www.rossde.com/garden/climate.html
Gardening diary at http://www.rossde.com/garden/diary

On Sat, 01 Mar 2014 22:41:56 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 03/01/2014 06:33 AM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 18:45:06 -0800, Todd wrote:

On 02/28/2014 04:57 PM, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:
On Friday, February 28, 2014 1:00:27 PM UTC-8, David Hare-Scott wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:



Just a thought: With all that Pacific Ocean out there just

off-shore, why not scale up successful Israeli desalination

technology via a Manhattan Project-sized program.



HB



Cost in money and greenhouse gases would be the obvious answer, not
that the

later seems to bother too many.



D

Uh, let's look at those factors:

Cost: If Nature (or global warming) continues to dry us up out here
on the West Coast of the U.S. how else are we going to get water for
nearly 40,000,000 in California alone, not counting other affected
states like Arizona & New Mexico. Thirty years since James Hansen
told Congress exactly what would happen and when, it is coming true
as predicted. Even the most corrupt legislator will be forced to
listen to their constituents rather than continuing their long,
well-emunerated love affair with Big Oil, Big Coal, and other
constituents of global warming.

Greenhouse gases: Not sure I see the relevance, but have a look at
what's been happening in the Middle East.

The relevance is that RO is very energy intensive and unless you source
your power from non-fossil sources you will be compounding the problem.


D


Here is an alternative:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/13724437/...age-drinkable/

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWW!!!!!!

Me thinks I will drink bottled water.

Every drop of water on this planet is the same as was here at its
creation, not a drop more or less... your bottled water is the same
water the dinosaurs ****ed.



Hi Brooklyn1,

Not a real good argument. Her is why I say so:

I work for a pump company, meaning wells. There are
rules as to how deep you well need to go so you
don't pick up harmful bacteria from surface water,
including dog poop from our lawns.

That is why a deep well with water from aquifer
with centuries old water in it is so pure.

I am much more confident of mother natures cleaning
mechanism than mans. I will drink the deep aquifer
water flowing out of Lake Tahoe centuries ago.
You can drink the reclaimed toilet water with all
the pharmaceuticals in it.

Our water here tastes better than any bottled water
I have ever come across. And yes, it may have been
dino **** at one time, but it has spent millions of
years percolating through the ground being cleaned
up by mother nature.

-T


Methinks you had best stick to pumping, reading comprehension is not
your forte.