Exactly the sort of b.s. we’ve come to expect from government. Via The San Gabriel Valley Tribune:
In order to save water in a severe drought, Laura Whitney-Korte reduced watering her lawn to two times a week, turns off the shower to suds up and never leaves the faucet running while brushing her teeth.
And what has she received for her water-saving efforts? A threatening letter from the city of Glendora’s code enforcement team saying that her brown lawn could be a “potential public nuisance problem” that may cost her $100-$500 in fines and possible criminal action.
“Despite the water conservation efforts, we wish to remind you that limited watering is still required to keep landscaping looking healthy and green,” read the letter, which said maintaining this appearance is part of keeping Glendora beautiful and keeping up city’s “Pride of the Foothills” image.
The letter, with the city seal and the police department seal, contained three pictures: a dead lawn with a red line through it, a weedy lawn also crossed out and a lush, green lawn with a sprinkler running in the daytime, apparently the positive example.
“It is telling me I’d better get my lawn green and I have 60 days to do it,” said Laura Whitney-Korte.
Whitney-Korte and her husband, Michael, are caught in a squeeze. On one hand, they said they want to obey Gov. Jerry Brown’s call to reduce water consumption 20 percent because California is in the third year of record low rainfall with some communities running out of water.
In fact, the governor’s call was strengthened Tuesday — the same day the couple received the letter — when the State Water Resources Control Board gave local agencies the power to hand out $500 fines for overwatering lawns.
Now, the couple says they are trying to avoid paying fines to City Hall for having an unkept front and side lawn, which they say ironically will require watering every day to remedy.
“It seems like you’ll be fined if you overwater but we will be fined no matter what,” said Laura, during an interview inside the couple’s 1946, post-war bungalow in south Glendora.
This story comes from the Los Angeles Times, which as far as I know is not a satire site:
Brian Reichle couldn’t have gotten a pepperoni pizza much faster.
Needing to replenish his stash of pot one recent afternoon, the Burbank resident dialed Speed Weed. Within the hour, a driver arrived with a white paper bag carrying a gram of cannabis, 10 joints and a handful of pot-infused candies and cookies.
“They come to my house, and they’re in and out,” said Reichle, 39, a comedian who spends about $100 a week on medical marijuana. “I shouldn’t have to go to a store.”
Once a small, word-of-mouth phenomenon, mobile marijuana businesses now number in the hundreds across Southern California. Nationwide, pot delivery services have nearly tripled in three years, from 877 to 2,617, according to Weedmaps, a Yelp-like online directory for pot businesses.
“I still believe 75% of marijuana patients don’t know delivery is a thing,” said Speed Weed owner A.J. Gentile, 42, a Bronx native who also works as a voice-over actor. “It’s safer to engage this way. You don’t have to go to a sketchy dispensary. That’s why we get so many female customers.”
The proliferation of delivery services is fueled in part by city efforts to reduce the number of dispensaries. About 200 have closed in Los Angeles since voters approved Proposition D last year, a spokesman for the city attorney’s office said.
Under the measure, dispensaries and their landlords can be prosecuted if the shops aren’t properly registered or if they fail to operate a legal distance from public parks, schools, child-care centers and other facilities. As a result, the owners of closed stores sitting on piles of unsold inventory figure they have little choice but to start a delivery service.
After Fr. Gregory’s beloved old tabby cat died, he adopted a kitten from the animal shelter and named her Frances. While chasing a squirrel one day, Frances ran up a tree, and then she refused to come back down.
The tree wasn’t sturdy enough for a grown man to climb, and Fr. Greg didn’t have a ladder. After thinking it over for a while, he had an idea. He took a piece of clothesline and tied one end to the tree and the other end to his car, thinking that he would drive just far enough to bend the tree down to where Frances could be reached from the ground.
But just about the time the tree was bent over far enough, the clothesline snapped. The tree sprang back and Frances sailed up into the air and out of sight.
The priest searched everywhere for his kitten, without success. Finally he gave up and prayed, “Lord, I commit Frances to your keeping.”
A few days later when Fr. Greg was at the grocery store, he met one of his parishioners, Mrs. Murray. He noticed that her shopping cart contained several bags of cat litter and a couple dozen cans of cat food.
“I didn’t know you had a cat,” he said.
“We do now,” Mrs. Murray said. She told him how her little girl had been begging and pleading for a cat, and how she had always said no. Then a few days ago, when her daughter had resumed her pleading yet again, Mrs. Murray had finally said, “Pray about it. If God gives you a cat, you can keep it.”
“And I know you won’t believe me, Father,” she continued, “but I saw it with my own eyes. Emily went out in the back yard, got down on her knees, and started praying. And a few seconds later, a kitten came flying out of the sky and landed right in front of her!”
By Scott Ott.
It’s no longer enough to believe that the climate is changing, and that man’s activities may have a role in it. In order to avoid an Amish-caliber shunning by the AGW cabal, you must set your hair on fire.
This comes from that great slayer of trees, the New York Times, which profiles Prof. John Christy of the University of Alabama, a pariah in his profession because he thinks many of his colleagues have overstated the case, and the potential consequences, of anthropogenic global warming:
Dr. Christy was pointing to a chart comparing seven computer projections of atmospheric temperatures above the United States with measurements taken by satellites and weather balloons. The projections traced a sharp upward slope; the actual measurements, however, ticked up only slightly.
Of course, the test of any theory is its utility in making predictions. But pointing out the discrepancies between theoretical predictions and actual data is just the kind of thing that gets Prof. Christy in hot water with those who think we’ll all be under water someday soon (or at least that Atlantic City may be renamed Atlantis City).
Christy, a heavily credentialed veteran climate scientist, actually edited a section of the famous 2001 UN report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Now fellow academics rebuff his handshake offer.
“I walked over and held out my hand to greet him,” Dr. Christy recalled. “He looked me in the eye and he said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘Come on, shake hands with me.’ And he said, ‘No.’ ”
As leaked emails revealed, academics in the AGW cabal also gossip behind his back like adolescents. If this doesn’t hurt his feelings, it hurts his chances of getting grants to advance his research.
“I’m a data-driven climate scientist. Every time I hear that phrase, ‘The science is settled,’ I say I can easily demonstrate that that is false, because this is the climate — right here. The science is not settled.”