the "Headline That Caught My Attention or the WTF" thread

MOJOE said:

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,><))))*>
><))))*<

Click to expand...

Department of Building had their Annual BBQ fest at Governor’s Island on Tuesday… kabooms…
.

But wait.... There's more!

Criminal record too..

well this can't be a good thing....................

Wreck of Shackleton’s Endurance Tied to Culprit Other Than Ice​

The explorer’s journey to Antarctica was likely doomed before it began.


The Endurance, in the background, stuck in ice in August 1915 during the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition led by Ernest Shackleton. In the foreground, a dog sled team on a food-gathering expedition. Credit...Frank Hurley/Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, via Getty

On Oct. 27, 1915, after being caught and crushed by packed ice for nine months in the Weddell Sea off Antarctica, Ernest Shackleton and his crew abandoned the Endurance and their quest to traverse the frozen continent by land. The doomed ship drifted atop the ice for three more weeks before finally sinking.

For over a century, experts have put the blame for the ship’s demise on an ice floe overwhelming the rudder and creating a large gash in the vessel. But a study released Monday in the journal Polar Record contends that the ship, not the ice, was to blame. The Endurance was ill equipped for its mission, a flaw that Shackleton was aware of long before he launched to Antarctica.

Jukka Tuhkuri, an ice researcher and naval architect at Aalto University in Finland and author of the new study, was aboard Endurance22 with the team that discovered the wreck in 2022. As a side project, he began analyzing diaries, personal correspondences and the ship’s wreckage to find out why the Endurance sank.

A year and a half later he was staring at images of what had been described as the strongest wooden ship ever built in the archives of the Royal Geological Society in London. A hypothesis came to him.

“It’s not the ice, it’s the ship,” Dr. Tuhkuri said.

He noticed that the hull of the Endurance lacked the beams that would have given it enough brawn to endure an onslaught of crushing ice. As a result, the rudder, stern post and part of the keel were torn apart, causing the ship to fill rapidly with water.

Ernest Shackleton during the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, 1914 to 1917.Credit...Frank Hurley/Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, via Getty Images

While Shackleton wrote in his book “South: A Memoir of the Endurance Voyage” that it was insurmountable ice floes that doomed his ship, the study suggests that he knew otherwise. He wrote to his wife, Emily Shackleton, that “this ship is not as strong as the Nimrod constructionally,” referring to the wooden vessel Shackleton took on his 1908 Antarctica expedition.

Endurance, a touring ship built for hunting polar bears and walruses in the Arctic, was “designed to work at the edge of the pack ice but not to be frozen in,” said Walter Ansel, the senior shipwright at Mystic Seaport Museum, in Mystic, Conn., who was not involved in the study.

Not only was Shackleton aware of Endurance’s shortcomings, but he also had the expertise on how to fix them. He had helped the German polar explorer Wilhelm Filchner equip his ship Deutschland with the same structural beams that Endurance lacked. Later, in 1912, Deutschland drifted in the ice-packed Antarctic waters for eight months but survived.

The paper notes five ice compression events taken from the diaries of crew members, building up to a culminating event on Oct. 17. One crew member, Reginald James, wrote that “the pressure was mostly along the region of the engine room where there are no beams of any strength.” Capt. Frank Worsley described the engine room as “the weakest part of the ship.” Both entries, dated to Oct. 17, describe a ship being crushed by ice because of its structural inadequacies.

The American whaling fleet had repeatedly run into similar catastrophes. In 1876, 12 inadequately reinforced ships were lost as a result of compressive ice near Alaska, Mr. Ansel said.

Michael Bravo, a professor at the Scott Polar Research Institute at the University of Cambridge, who was not involved in the study, said many polar exploration ships were not suited for their journeys. Such vessels were seldom readily available. “Most of them were purchased second hand and adapted as time and money permitted,” Dr. Bravo said.

Indeed, this could have been true of Endurance, suggests Michael Smith, author of the book “Shackleton: By Endurance We Conquer,” who was not involved in the new study. Shackleton may have known that the ship wasn’t ideal for the voyage. But he was restless at home, and struggling with financial debt and a failing marriage.

“The scale of this expedition is truly daunting, but he needed something to get his teeth into and he wanted to get away,” Mr. Smith said. He added that Shackleton was competing with other explorers to conquer the Antarctic.

Still, Mr. Smith doubts this will change our view of Shackleton. Historians knew already that he was a man who took chances and made big calls under pressure. The grave risks of these missions were known to the explorers.

“To be a polar explorer a century ago was an act of faith in itself,” Mr. Smith said.

There is so much wrong with this I don't even know where to start.


Initiative and Referendum, predatory lawsuits, the sheer ineffectiveness of this bright idea and the unintended consequences all just make my hair hurt.

This is how a Nobel Laureate behaves, not being a self-promoting, attention grabbing Pimpasaurus rex...

His Off-the-Grid Vacation Was Interrupted by Winning a Nobel Prize​

Fred Ramsdell found out about his Nobel Prize nearly 12 hours after it was announced because he was on vacation in the Rockies.

Fred Ramsdell was parked at a campground in Montana on Monday afternoon after camping and hiking across the Rocky Mountains when his wife, Laura O’Neill, suddenly started shouting.

He first thought that maybe she had seen a grizzly bear. Instead, Ms. O’Neill had regained cellular service and had seen a flood of text messages with the same news. “You just won the Nobel Prize!” she yelled.

“No, I didn’t,” said Dr. Ramsdell, whose phone had been on airplane mode, he recalled in an interview. But she said, “I have 200 text messages saying that you did!”

They had missed a 2 a.m. call from the Nobel committee that Dr. Ramsdell and two others had been awarded the 2025 prize for medicine for their research into the immune system. They also missed congratulations from their friends and family. His lab, Sonoma Biotherapeutics, said he “was living his best life and was off the grid on a preplanned hiking trip.”

Dr. Ramsdell, 64, had not expected any important phone calls that morning and was offline, as he usually is while on vacation. His wife, on the other hand, preferred to be more communicative with her friends and family.

“I certainly didn’t expect to win the Nobel Prize,” he said from a hotel in Montana. “It never crossed my mind.”

The stop in Montana near Yellowstone National Park on Monday afternoon was nearly the end of a three-week vacation that crossed the mountain ranges of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. Dr. Ramsdell, Ms. O’Neill, their Gordon setter and rescue husky mix had set off last month from Seattle in their Toyota 4Runner with a small teardrop trailer in the back.

At work, Dr. Ramsdell’s research has helped improve care for autoimmune diseases like some types of arthritis, multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease, he said. Outside of work, he likes to unplug in nature.

“I spend as much time as I can up in the mountains,” he said. “We tend to go into the remote areas,” he said, adding that he and his wife always looked out for bison, moose, elk and eagles.

When he got to the hotel in Livingston, Mont., on Monday night, he finally spoke with Thomas Perlmann, the secretary-general of the Nobel Assembly, about 20 hours after Dr. Perlmann first tried to call him. Dr. Perlmann said in an interview that it had never been this difficult to reach a laureate since he assumed the role in 2016.

Dr. Ramsdell tried returning Dr. Perlmann’s call from the campground, but it was 11 p.m. in Sweden and Dr. Perlmann had fallen asleep. They finally connected when Dr. Perlmann woke up at 6:15 a.m. on Tuesday. “Eventually, it worked,” Dr. Perlmann said.

On Tuesday, Dr. Ramsdell planned to drive the six hours left on his trip to get to his fall and winter home near Whitefish, Mont.

“I was just grateful and humbled by getting the award, super happy for the recognition of the work in general and just looking forward to sharing this with my colleagues, as well,” he said.

Text of article. Because paywall:

A federal district court judge last week cited a vacated 2007 opinion and colonial-era "royal proclamations" in ruling against three Shinnecock Indian Nation fishermen who sought a declaration affirming their aboriginal right to fish in New York waters.

The case, which stems from a 2018 federal lawsuit brought by the three tribe members who had been cited in separate commercial fishing cases by the state, denied a motion for summary judgment seeking to prevent state regulators from interfering with their fishing beyond tribal waterways.

The decision by Central Islip-based federal District Judge Gary Brown granted a summary judgment sought by the state Department of Environmental Conservation and its officers, including former DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos and two Long Island enforcement officers, rejecting the Shinnecock claim.

In his ruling, Brown, while acknowledging he "need not reach the question of aboriginal rights," nevertheless weighed into a contentious issue, citing a 2007 opinion by former District Court Judge Joseph Bianco that found 17th century land purchases "by British colonists and subsequent royal proclamations demonstrate an ‘extinguishment of aboriginal title’ in present day Southampton."

Bianco’s "well-reasoned determination undermines plaintiff’s arguments that they have aboriginal title to fish in Shinnecock Bay," Brown wrote, even while noting that the Bianco decision was later vacated "on other grounds."

David Taobi Silva, one of the fishermen, in an interview, called the decision "disappointing," and said he plans to appeal. "It really feels like the judge didn't read anything that we submitted," said Silva of hundreds of pages of amicus briefs by Indian law experts and professors, including from Stanford University.

In addition, Silva said, the Bianco decision was about land, not fishing rights. "The judge drew a conclusion that was not even presented to him," he said. "It's a misapplication is really what it is. These are totally different cases."

The Shinnecock Nation has consistently rejected the Bianco opinion, saying they have never relinquished ownership of their sovereign land, notably in cases involving its Westwoods property in Hampton Bays. The U.S. Department of the Interior affirmed their aboriginal title to the land earlier this year.

The DEC, in a statement to Newsday, said, it was "pleased" the judge "granted summary judgment in DEC’s favor. DEC is eager to return our focus to fostering our working relationship with the Shinnecock Nation and their leadership."

Beside the question of aboriginal rights, Brown also pointed to the need for fishing regulations and prior rulings that show Indian nations can be subject to them.

State regulators at the DEC have instituted regulations to "protect aquatic species," notably the American eel population that Silva was cited for taking without a license.

"Conservation of eel species is essential for maintaining food chains in aquatic ecosystems and protecting species for whom eel is an important food source, such as various fish, birds, and mammals," Brown wrote.

The main question is whether, "regardless of any aboriginal title, the state fishing regulations at issue are reasonable and nondiscriminatory," Brown wrote. He also noted that under the doctrine of conservation necessity, states "can impose reasonable and nondiscriminatory regulations on an Indian tribe’s treaty-based hunting, fishing, and gathering rights on state land when necessary for conservation."

Brown also noted a case brought by the Unkechaug Indian Nation in federal court in which the Mastic-based nation "challenged these same American eel regulations." In that case, Brown wrote, Judge William Kuntz granted summary judgment for the state, finding that New York "has a clear interest in conserving the American eel population, and it has imposed reasonable, non-discriminatory regulations in furtherance of this interest."

Maintaining the eel population," Brown wrote, ... "benefits recreational and commercial fisheries, which provide employment opportunities and play a vital role in numerous industries."

Avenger said:

Shinnecock fishermen lose court battle over fishing rights

A federal judge ruled against three Shinnecock fishermen, citing colonial-era proclamations, denying their claim to aboriginal fishing rights in New York waters.

www.newsday.com

Text of article. Because paywall:

A federal district court judge last week cited a vacated 2007 opinion and colonial-era "royal proclamations" in ruling against three Shinnecock Indian Nation fishermen who sought a declaration affirming their aboriginal right to fish in New York waters.

The case, which stems from a 2018 federal lawsuit brought by the three tribe members who had been cited in separate commercial fishing cases by the state, denied a motion for summary judgment seeking to prevent state regulators from interfering with their fishing beyond tribal waterways.

The decision by Central Islip-based federal District Judge Gary Brown granted a summary judgment sought by the state Department of Environmental Conservation and its officers, including former DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos and two Long Island enforcement officers, rejecting the Shinnecock claim.

In his ruling, Brown, while acknowledging he "need not reach the question of aboriginal rights," nevertheless weighed into a contentious issue, citing a 2007 opinion by former District Court Judge Joseph Bianco that found 17th century land purchases "by British colonists and subsequent royal proclamations demonstrate an ‘extinguishment of aboriginal title’ in present day Southampton."

Bianco’s "well-reasoned determination undermines plaintiff’s arguments that they have aboriginal title to fish in Shinnecock Bay," Brown wrote, even while noting that the Bianco decision was later vacated "on other grounds."

David Taobi Silva, one of the fishermen, in an interview, called the decision "disappointing," and said he plans to appeal. "It really feels like the judge didn't read anything that we submitted," said Silva of hundreds of pages of amicus briefs by Indian law experts and professors, including from Stanford University.

In addition, Silva said, the Bianco decision was about land, not fishing rights. "The judge drew a conclusion that was not even presented to him," he said. "It's a misapplication is really what it is. These are totally different cases."

The Shinnecock Nation has consistently rejected the Bianco opinion, saying they have never relinquished ownership of their sovereign land, notably in cases involving its Westwoods property in Hampton Bays. The U.S. Department of the Interior affirmed their aboriginal title to the land earlier this year.

The DEC, in a statement to Newsday, said, it was "pleased" the judge "granted summary judgment in DEC’s favor. DEC is eager to return our focus to fostering our working relationship with the Shinnecock Nation and their leadership."

Beside the question of aboriginal rights, Brown also pointed to the need for fishing regulations and prior rulings that show Indian nations can be subject to them.

State regulators at the DEC have instituted regulations to "protect aquatic species," notably the American eel population that Silva was cited for taking without a license.

"Conservation of eel species is essential for maintaining food chains in aquatic ecosystems and protecting species for whom eel is an important food source, such as various fish, birds, and mammals," Brown wrote.

The main question is whether, "regardless of any aboriginal title, the state fishing regulations at issue are reasonable and nondiscriminatory," Brown wrote. He also noted that under the doctrine of conservation necessity, states "can impose reasonable and nondiscriminatory regulations on an Indian tribe’s treaty-based hunting, fishing, and gathering rights on state land when necessary for conservation."

Brown also noted a case brought by the Unkechaug Indian Nation in federal court in which the Mastic-based nation "challenged these same American eel regulations." In that case, Brown wrote, Judge William Kuntz granted summary judgment for the state, finding that New York "has a clear interest in conserving the American eel population, and it has imposed reasonable, non-discriminatory regulations in furtherance of this interest."

Maintaining the eel population," Brown wrote, ... "benefits recreational and commercial fisheries, which provide employment opportunities and play a vital role in numerous industries."

Click to expand...

Indians are not black. They all smoke crack in mastic, no boats. Who comes up with this crap fishing rights.

OK
I can work with that.......................

He wants f able men. See?

This post was deleted because the poster, posted it knowing it was Political.

If it continues I will lock the thread.

Regards,

WD

Oh , do tell.......


Let me guess. Issued to No Name Given?

Avenger said:

Oh , do tell.......

Long Island DMV workers arrested in scheme to sell commercial driver's permits, DA says

Nassau County authorities say passing grades on commercial driving tests were for sale at the Garden City DMV.

www.cbsnews.com

Let me guess. Issued to No Name Given?

Click to expand...

Sounds about the right timing.

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!!!

Apparently consulting and DEI training contract deals?


Looks like somebody blinked, or opened their eyes.

You just can't make this $#it up...

Oh wait.... you don't have to.

That's it. I am sick to goddam death of trans people being banned from Quidditch tournaments.