Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Donald Trump thread

If you reduce the river flow in the Bay Delta by extracting more upstream, you allow tidal salt water further upstream and the fish die. More importantly, you cut off the freshwater supply to the pumps extracting water for part of the San Francisco Bay area..


If what you say is correct, it sounds to me like a relatively minor technical problem with simple solutions eg extract the water futher upstream or provide a barrage permitting one-way flow.

Donald Trump has realised that he is not obliged to play the "Elect a President" game according to the implicit rules that have always applied. You may be appalled by discovering some details where what he says does not, in your view, add up. But that is not going to prevent his being elected.

May 30, 2016 at 8:02 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Martin A & EM

Fishermen have fished in tidal estuary waters that can be fresh, salty, or a bit brackish, changing twice a day for thousands of years.

Apparently fish can swim, and find the right habitat. Tragedies do happen, when storms at sea or land cause exceptional flow, above the normal tidal flows, but other creatures tend to eat up any mess, and are perfectly happy about this form of naturally occurring aquatic pollution.

Having sailed/motored boats from seawater into freshwater and vice versa, many times, I have never seen evidence of a mass extermination event.

May 30, 2016 at 9:58 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Martin A, golf Charlie

Ultimately it is not about how or where you do the extraction. The problem is that the demand for water is going up and, judging from the state of Lake Mead, the total volume available from precipitation and groundwater is going down.

IIRC, if Lake Mead is still below 1075ft asl in January, then a wide range of rationing measures kick in. Watch the fun then.

May 30, 2016 at 11:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

@golf charlie wrote:

Apparently fish can swim, and find the right habitat.

But, but, but ...

According to "The Resumed Review Conference on the Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UNFSA, or the Agreement) [which] convened from 23-27 May 2016 at UN Headquarters in New York" it ain't necessarily so.

For all the boring, gory details of yet another (unchartered) grab on the part of yet another increasingly removed from reality fingerling of the UN, see here.

Needless to say, the most prominent feature of this IISD quasi-official report of the proceedings is that it is riddled with acronyms of the mostly unfathomable kind.

As for the apparent possible Trump ascendancy ... If I were a Yank, I'm not sure that he would be my candidate of choice ... except for the fact that Canada's Obama-clone, aka Trudeau Junior, continues to mock him; this strongly suggests to me that Trump may well have many redeeming qualities.

P.S. While I'm here - and still recovering from my own "hiatus" during which I have been lurking (for the most part silently) - I must say that you have brightened many of my days, golf charlie, with your wit and wisdom. So many thanks for the smiles and chuckles you have induced :-)

May 30, 2016 at 11:36 PM | Registered CommenterHilary Ostrov

Hilary Ostrov, thank you for your kind words. I look forward to reading more of your scientific observations and comments from the other side of the pond (and up a bit)

I don't think Trudeau Junior is likely to be hoping for a Trump win. It will wreck his chances for a second term, if he is seen to be holding back the Canadian Economy.

I don't think Trudeau Junior is the only Premier in the world, thinking exactly the same. Hopefully Trump can achieve what is needed within a single term.

May 31, 2016 at 1:06 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Entropic man on May 30, 2016 at 11:29 PM
"... then a wide range of rationing measures kick in. Watch the fun then."

The alternative to authoritarianism is the market:
But Donald Trump Is Right About California Water -- The Problem Is The Price, Not The Drought

May 31, 2016 at 2:36 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

Martin, how do you know those things about him?

And if he wont provide details, what are the policy positions (like detailed tax bands) at

May 31, 2016 at 2:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterRaff

Welcome back from your hiatus Hilary Ostrov. I'm actually feeling a little bit guilty because I suspect I may once have written some comment rude to you some years ago in error and without proper justification, and it's been playing on my mind since. Even if my memory is deficient or you didn't read it, I'll apologise anyway just in case.

May 31, 2016 at 2:50 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

I noticed that the problem described here will need addressing by the next POTUS, and that the last sentence quoted below is very familiar:
Obamacare Is Failing -- on Purpose?

Obamacare’s exchanges could soon be out of health insurers.

This month, UnitedHealth – the largest U.S. insurer — announced that it would no longer sell exchange plans in New Jersey in 2017. It has now withdrawn from 27 states. Last year, UnitedHealth lost about $475 million on the exchanges; this year, it’s projecting $500 million in losses

The story is similar for other insurers. Many have decided to abandon markets they have long served. That’s left people fewer options for coverage. And with less competition on the exchanges, the plans that remain have more freedom to hike premiums.

Obamacare’s ongoing dysfunction is bad enough. But the looming collapse of its exchanges is prompting calls for even more government involvement in health care — even a single-payer system.

It takes a special kind of reasoning to respond to the spectacular failure of government that is Obamacare by calling for, well, even more government.

May 31, 2016 at 3:04 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

I followed up the detail behind his [Trump's] California drought comments. He was making promises to deliver water that does not exist. The only way to increase the water supply to one group of Californians is to take it away from another group of Californians.
May 30, 2016 at 4:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

On a day to day basis, he certainly cannot magic water from the air. But there is plenty of water in California that is untapped and not used by other Californians. It requires building some dams and other hydro-engineering projects.
Environmentalists are not using that water, nor any other Californians. It will take some time and money. If done sensibly, the environmental costs will also probably be much less than the greens claim: Fish ladders for the salmon are a tourist attraction at Ballard Locks in Seattle.

The fish turn out to be irrelevant.

Yes. Trump would likely put people before fishes. Fishes don't vote yet, not even in California. Californians need to get a grip, and not be led by an environmental ring through the nose.

May 31, 2016 at 3:10 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

michael hart, let us not forget that the Australians are finding some of their desalinators to be surplus to requirements, and might need to sell them unused, but second hand, to reduce debt.

You would have thought the Malthusian tendencies of the Green Blob would be celebrating the inability of rainfall to keep up with an increasing population's ever increasing demand for water.

I think that some 'Environmentalists' are like fish out of water, when lecturing others about the perils faced by fish in water. Soon they will be campaigning for supplies of arm-bands to stop fish from drowning.

May 31, 2016 at 5:02 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

So EM says "What is very clear about Trump is that he makes promises which are impossible to deliver."

EM is hopelessly naive, just look at Obama's record in office. Why should Trump be held to a higher standard of truthfulness than the darling of the eco-Fascist brigades?

Jun 2, 2016 at 7:16 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

Interesting to note that although the Yanks are planning missions to Mars; they have still not taken advantage of the fact that 66% of the planet is covered by water. ^.^
Hilary Ostrov:
A genuinely heart felt welcome back! You have helped me out and supported me during some of my bad times on the hill, I hope you soon feel happier with your life again!

Jun 2, 2016 at 10:03 PM | Registered CommenterDung

Will Hillary be there to fight Trump, assuming she can beat Sanders?

Scott Adams Takes Swipe at Hillary Clinton’s Health: ‘Part Human, Part Pharmacological Grab-Bag’
"Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert and a blogger who correctly predicted the rise of Donald Trump, wrote [on] Thursday that Hillary Clinton’s use of medication and alcohol make her thought process less consistent than Trump’s.

... in Adams’ view.

Trump doesn’t drink. He never has. He doesn’t take illegal drugs either. He’s the same guy at night that he is in the morning. He’s not a chemical cyborg with a personality that is driven by big pharma.

Clinton, on the other hand, is part human, part pharmacological grab-bag. Her personality is at least partly determined by whatever cocktail of meds and wine are in her system at any given moment. In other words, she is just like most adults. Our personalities are the product of the drugs in our system, for better or for worse.

Jun 3, 2016 at 10:12 AM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

And Adams bases this on what, exactly?

Jun 3, 2016 at 4:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall

Alan Kendall on Jun 3, 2016 at 4:55 PM

Adams, who is a trained hypnotist and has studied the various tools of persuasion for years, explains all in the piece linked to the Breitbart article:
Scott Adams' Blog: The Risks of a Trump Presidency

This is one of the many important points Adams makes:

Do foreign leaders WANT a President Trump? Hell, no. Trump says he plans to negotiate better deals for America, which means worse deals for everyone else. Of course foreign leaders are going to tell us Trump is risky, scary, and anything else bad, just to stop him.

I doubt any foreign leader is literally afraid of Trump. But they might want you to think they are afraid of him, so you won’t elect him. Foreign leaders are not idiots. To some extent, they are playing us

Following the same logic, it is why Obama and all our Continental 'friends' wants us to stay in the EU.

If we vote to Remain, we will be on course to continue our Euro version of co-dependency, something that successful escapees from dysfunctional families understand, even if they don't know what it is called.

Jun 4, 2016 at 12:09 AM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

@golf charlie, michael hart and Dung ... Many thanks for your welcoming words as I gingerly step back into post-hiatus posting mode:-)

@michael hart, I have absolutely no recollection of your alleged rude comment to me - those of others I could name (as indeed I have in the past) have ensconced themselves in my virtual little black book! But I see that you have invoked the ... uh ... precautionary principle ... And I shall do likewise; ergo, I forgive you ;-)

Jun 4, 2016 at 12:51 AM | Registered CommenterHilary Ostrov

So a hypnotist, A HYPNOTIST!!, is qualified to make quasi-medical calumnies about political opponents and be praised and lauded for doing so here. Weeeeeelllllll.

Jun 4, 2016 at 8:40 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall

Alan Kendall on Jun 4, 2016 at 8:40 AM
"So a hypnotist, A HYPNOTIST!!, is qualified to make quasi-medical calumnies about political opponents and be praised and lauded for doing so here."

If you have any evidence that those observations are false or that the conclusions are way off, please inform us, as we take a very serious view of unwarranted accusations. I looked at the evidence, which was of a comparative nature, and Trump's demeanour is consistent, in his dealings, he hasn't put his nation at risk for personal gain, nor lost an ambassador and several seals, so I think the points of view expressed were fair and warranted.

I suppose, if a Trotskyist Music teacher can become a Newsnight Business Editor or English graduates can pontificate on TV and radio about the Scientific aspects of the changes in climate or, with addition of a PhD in Writing for Women: a study of woman as reader in Elizabethan romance, can dismiss fraccing because they now nothing about it, even though they have the resources of the HoC library to hand, we cannot dismiss a talented cartoonist who has spent his life studying human behaviour, and got paid for what he drew!

Jun 4, 2016 at 10:57 AM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

Alan Kendall, you never know, climate scientists will have psychologists writing 97% of their most popular work soon.

Perhaps as a hypnotist, Adams is used to looking into people's eyes? Don't trust me though, I am not a Doctor either.

Jun 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

RC. The political mud was flung by Adams and repeated here, without supporting proof. I asked for supporting evidence and was supplied with statements that Adams is a hypnotist, and this presumably was evidence of Adams' great acumen and political insider knowledge (you really couldn't make it up!). I express incredulity and now you come on all heavy, demanding from me evidence to prove the slurs given by Adams were untrue, and furthermore accuse little ol' moi of making unfounded accusations. It is we here at BH who are encouraged to be skeptical. I was being skeptical, then mirthful, finally incredulous.

Come on man, get a grip!

Has your great love of the hairstyle du jour tripped your critical faculties? From this viewpoint.......

Jun 4, 2016 at 11:59 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall

En passant Never trust a man who won't have a drink with you, (or has a hair style that could be patented).

Jun 4, 2016 at 12:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall


Jun 4, 2016 at 12:26 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Proof of expertise is when your predictions turn out to be right
Scott Adams predicted Trumps success more than 1 year ago
You can listen to the BBC prog Correspondents Look Ahead...from January and hear that none of them predicted Trumps success

Jun 4, 2016 at 12:28 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Stewgreen. Please don't write of Robert in those negative terms (dramaqueening). He's merely trying to support an unsupportable argument. I'm sure he won't appreciate you butting in like this, even though he might be an ABBA fan.

With regard to successful predictions about Trump, battles and wars come to mind. One successful prediction does not make a seer. Good to hear that you take hypnotism seriously as your compardres. Do you use it to convince yourself about Brexit?

Would you support someone who wouldn't have a drink with you?

Jun 4, 2016 at 1:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlan Kendall