bachanon

i had a non-christian, non-environmentalist wacko geology professor a few years back who pointed out that the "ozone damaging gases" that spewed from the eruption of mount pinatubo (sp?) released more "ozone damaging" chemicals in the atmosphere than the entire industrial revolution. the earth was consequently cooled because of this. one cannot assume that global warming is a fact. the following is an article that supports this idea: Polar ice cap studies refute global warming Written By: James M. Taylor Published In: Environment News Publication Date: October 1, 2001 Publisher: The Heartland Institute -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A series of recent studies shows that the polar ice caps, which should be shrinking if dire global warming theories are correct, are maintaining their mass and in fact growing slightly. The studies suggest satellite temperature readings, which indicate no global warming of the lower atmosphere, are more reliable than surface temperature readings, taken by humans under varying conditions, that had indicated a slow, gradual warming. A study published in the December 3, 1999 issue of Science magazine, authored by Ola Johannessen, Elena Shalena, and Martin Miles, reported Arctic sea ice had declined by 14 percent from 1978 through 1998. In a related story, columnist Richard Kerr pondered "Will the Arctic Ocean lose all its ice?" The mainstream press ran with the story, giving dire warnings that global warming was upon us. However, CO2 Science Magazine later noted that in the Johannessen study, "essentially all of the drop . . . occurs rather abruptly over a single period of not more than three years (87/88-90/91) and possibly only one year (89/90-90/91). Furthermore, it could be argued from their data that from 1990/91 onward, sea ice area in the Arctic may have actually increased." More recent studies of the polar ice caps verify CO2 Science Magazine's skepticism, and show the polar ice caps are holding their own and actually growing slightly. Antarctic sea ice edge expanding A study published in the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate (Yuan, X. and Martinson, D.G., "Antarctic sea ice extent variability and its global connectivity," Volume 13: 1697-1717 (2000)) demonstrated the Antarctic polar ice cap has been expanding. According to the study, 18 years of satellite data indicate the mean Antarctic sea ice edge has expanded by 0.011 degrees of latitude toward the equator each year. A later study, also published in Journal of Climate (Watkins, A.B. and Simmonds, I., "Current trends in Antarctic sea ice: The 1990s impact on a short climatology," Volume 13: 4441-4451 (2000)) reached a similar conclusion. The study reported significant increases in Antarctic sea ice between 1987 and 1996. The study further indicated the 1990s exhibited increases in the length of the sea-ice season. Arctic ice thickening, expanding A study published in Geophysical Research Letters (Winsor, P., "Arctic sea ice thickness remained constant during the 1990s," Volume 28: 1039-1041 (2001)) found the same to be true in the Arctic. The study concluded, "mean ice thickness has remained on a near-constant level around the North Pole from 1986-1997." Moreover, the study noted data from six different submarine cruises under the Arctic sea ice showed little variability and a "slight increasing trend" in the 1990s. Just off the Arctic polar ice cap, ice coverage in Greenland was also shown to be steady and likely increasing. A study in Journal of Geophysical Research (Comiso, J.C., Wadhams, P., Pedersen, L.T. and Gersten, R.A., Volume 106: 9093-9116 (2001)) concluded that, annual variances notwithstanding, the Odden ice tongue in Greenland exhibited no statistically significant change from 1979 to 1998. Moreover, proxy reconstruction of the ice tongue utilizing air temperature data indicated the ice covers a greater area today than it did several decades ago. Viewed as a whole, the new ice cap studies indicate no global warming has occurred in recent decades, at least not in high latitudes. These findings also offer an important insight into one of the more significant controversies surrounding global warming theory. Surface vs. satellite readings Surface temperature readings taken by humans indicate the Earth has warmed by approximately 1 degree Fahrenheit over the past 100 years. This warming is certainly not much, but it is often cited as evidence that global warming is occurring, even if it is merely in its initial stages. However, precise satellite readings of the lower atmosphere (a region that is supposed to immediately reflect any global warming) have shown no warming since readings were begun more than 20 years ago. "We have seen no sign of man-induced global warming at all. The computer models used in U.N. studies say the first area to heat under the 'greenhouse gas effect' should be the lower atmosphere, known as the troposphere. Highly accurate, carefully checked satellite data have shown absolutely no warming," explained Tom Randall of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Global warming skeptics have pointed out that most of the surface temperature readings indicating a warming have been taken in underdeveloped nations, where reliability and quality-control are questionable. In developed nations such as the United States, by contrast, the readings tend to show no warming. Moreover, skeptics note, surface temperature readings are influenced by artificial warming associated with growing urbanization, which creates artificial heat islands around temperature reading stations. "While the greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have grown in the last 50 years, the correlation with a warming of the world's climate is weak and far from being generally accepted by the scientific community," James L. Johnston, a member of The Heartland Institute's Board of Directors, observed in the August 4 Chicago Tribune. Global warming proponents, on the other hand, now counter that warming, despite prior consensus to the contrary, might occur in the lower atmosphere only after a general warming of the Earth's surface. Models shown to be inaccurate . . . again The recent polar ice studies, which measured surface rather than atmospheric temperature trends (and which were far removed from the effects of urban heat islands and questionable third-world temperature readings), lend weight to the argument that satellite readings, not surface monitoring stations, are correct. "In considering all of the above results, it is likely that the global extent of sea ice is on the rise. Such observational evidence flies in the face of model predictions of global warming that say climate will change first and to the greatest extent in the Earth's polar regions," concludes CO2 Science Magazine. CO2 Science suggests that self-regulating mechanisms, such as clouds, enable the Earth to keep a relatively steady climate despite the changes in CO2 concentration that have been a regular part of Earth's history. Viewing the new data in conjunction with other studies that properly filter out the imperfections of human-collected temperature readings, CO2 Science concludes, "There has been no global warming for the past 75 years." LINK

i disagree. town center in the woodlands, for instance, is required to produce annual studies of how the TCID is affecting surrounding areas. they are required to analyze crime, property values, traffic congestion, etc. homes within one mile of TCID are being sold for 17 to 20% higher than similar homes 10 miles away. they are calling it the "town center" effect. i purchased my home for 112K (1982 square feet) in 2002 near the intersection of grogan's mill and woodlands parkway, basically across the street from town center. i paid about 6k over market value. there were no other homes in the area for sale in my price range when i needed to purchase. other homes in my neighborhood with the same or similar floor plans and no upgrades (1970's era kitchens, original ac units, etc.) are now on the market for 132K. deed restrictions will require that no tear downs occur that do not keep the original "feel" of the 70's contemporary style and colors. buying in the area i live is a definite win for anyone willing to hold on to property. my realtor purchased a home across grogan's mill from me within three months of my purchase. houses going on the market in this same area are selling within weeks rather than months. one home down the street from me that was on the market for 139K in 2003 has recently been on the market for 160K. there are pockets of real estate throughout houston that achieve larger increases in value than your average home. locating these areas is the key. i do not believe that used homes in champions are near this level of value increase.

there was downtown revitalization going on before the light rail. there were speculators holding on to buildings before light rail. light rail enhanced the interest that was already afoot.

alright mrfootball, how about enthusiam rather than propaganda? he is right when he says that the development near the intersection of 1960 and 249 are a focal point for the surrounding areas. if development in the area progresses with a centrally focused "town center", i can see how that will benefit neighborhoods within a few miles. the main reason i do not prefer the champions area (regardless of the great demographics) is the sluggish traffic in the area. one more item...........yes, living in the woodlands past panther creek, grogan's mill, indian springs and cochran's crossing requires the same patience, and sometime more so, than living in champions. i can't imagine living in sterling ridge or alden bridge unless i worked in the area. i do believe that homes in close proximity to the woodlands' town center and i-45 are seeing increased property values better than those in neighborhoods near champions. please forgive my "one note" trumpet blowing. i REALLY wanted to live in the woodlands and i love it more now that i'm here than before. that being said.........follow your bliss!

club patrons are fickle. if it's trendy and hip, expect it to have a short life. people who are hell-bent on seeing and being seen and who love the next big thing will tire easily of any new concept or location. why numbers is still around is a mystery to me. i have great affection for the place, as do others, maybe that's why. a club district is difficult to sustain without a constant stream of newcomers, say college students, tourists or conventions goers for instance.

what you say is true, pineda. my concern is that these neighborhoods away from an urban center, after the housing boom is over, will suffer the most depreciation. these areas with development after development of 150k and under homes will become slums, just as the homes under 60k became during the 80s. it comes back to the simple idea that location is the primary rule.

the show is an embarrassment to the city of houston. the host looks like she's on too many prescriptions and never seems to know what's going on. somebody, please, cancel the damn show! i saw them scooping ben and jerry's and tossing it into a barrel for cirque du soleil tickets. one cohost had the barrel on her head. one contestant was aiming for the host's face. it was hysterical. cirque's pr people should be ashamed. i despise this show.

windrose. there will be new figures out (if not already) for neighborhood values in 2005. people buying new homes in areas with massive growth should not expect their new home values to rise quickly. the couple i'm speaking of and one other couple who purchased near mason and the westpark tollway have both had their home values stagnant for the last several years. they purchased typical cookie cutter new homes by builders like emerald or d. r. horton. couple no. 1 put 30k in upgrades to their 130k home (bad idea). thousands of similar homes are within two miles of their house. a newcomer to this area can buy a new home for the same price or less than couple no. 1 paid over five years ago, not including the upgrades. if they had bought a 150k house in grogan's mill in a neighborhood near north millbend, across woodlands parkway near the woodlands waterway and town center, they would have seen significant movement in their home value (with the exception of the "glen mill" neighborhood). the same goes for other areas of the city i'm sure. word to the wise, buy in grogan's mill. 35 minutes to downtown (not in rush hour of course). oh, back to the champions theme. if it hasn't begun already, wait until the kuykendahl/1960 intersection construction begins. they are running 1960 under kuykendahl or vice versa, similar to the intersection at i-45 and 1960.

why even consider champions/champions forest? the commute is longer than living in grogan's mill in the woodlands and taking the hardy toll road. the only amenity i can see for living in the middle of the dreadful 1960 area is the klein school district (and not every school for that matter). buy a fixer upper in grogan's mill that is over 3000 square feet, spend less money per square foot and benefit from the "town center effect". my home has increased in value over the last three years by almost 30%. of course, i'm walking distance from the woodlands waterway, but there are at least 100 homes for sale in the same area. i have friends who bought a new home off of 2920 and kuykendahl five or six years ago and the property values in their neighborhood have plummeted nearly 6% annually because of all the new construction nearby, and not to mention the fact that the dreaded grand parkway may cut through or near their neighborhood. buy in the woodlands near town center or something closer to houston proper, like sugarland.

the new "town green" park across the street from market street will be open until 11PM, starting in april. the park connects to the waterway. expect some more hand wringing (possibly me ) over this same age group this summer. at least they'll have more places to hang out. it will be interesting to see if these new regulations at market street effect the sales at starbucks, jamba juice, potbelly's and johnny rockets. there really aren't too many businesses at market street that cater to the under 17 crowd.

the new facility will be on thirty acres in research forest in the woodlands. announcement similar thread

the juxtaposition of opposing styles is what it means to be diverse architecturally.........to some, anyway. for some, it is inherent in a progressively urban, mixed-use environ that styles are aberrant and contrasting. should montrose be sugarland? i do not intend to denigrate the honorable ideal of respecting the relationship of a structure to it's surroundings; however, in the "big picture", does it matter, that is, if it's good? for example, if frank lloyd wright's new york guggenheim were to be built on bissonnet between dunlavy and shepherd, would i care? absolutely not. if it is good and enjoyable and functional........let it be. to worry over neighborhood context (at least in houston's free-wheeling real estate climate) is ultimately uncessary. let's enjoy it where it occurs and find the beauty in the contrast. Vive Le Difference!

were you there? we went there a couple times after la strada on sunday afternoons. good times.

my parents took me there for a birthday party once. we have some old home movies with pictures of us on the rides. no pictures that i'm aware of though.

TCID Adopts Rules for Town Green Park Violators Can Be Fined, Arrested The Woodlands, Texas-- The Board of Directors, Town Center Improvement District (TCID) in The Woodlands, has adopted a series of rules and regulations governing the use of Town Green Park. Full Story

congrats to chloe dao! we're proud of you.

I tried to watch "great day houston" this morning and fell asleep, finding sleep more pleasurable than the show I had to turn on the weather channel in order to continue sleeping. The yapping of the host and cohosts was excruciating.

Festival Website

is the increase in construction costs and concrete due to fuel prices, demand or both?

thanks!

i've been trying to upload some photos i took lately and the sites i'm aquainted with are not working. i've tried snapfish and msn spaces. any help is appreciated.

i agree that you should find the landlord and let him know that his house could be getting trashed. i too have a rental property and would very much appreciate a heads up if my tenants were abusing the property and annoying the neighbors. also, talk to the other tenants in your fourplex and see if you are not the only one having a problem. although i'm sensitive to your plight, i'm reminded why i like strict neighborhood covenants and a diligent neighborhood association.

in response to the woodlands' sales level in nancy's article.......i hardly think that being on a list of "top sales" is something to brag about. it is not good for my community (or others IMHO) to grow at this rate. considering the size of the woodlands.......maybe it's not that big of a deal. it still irks me that people want to brag about top "new home" sales. to me, it seems like "too much, too soon". am i wrong?