Youtube daily can Nov 4 2017

John Ossanna: Welcome from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Conservation Training Center

here in Shepherdstown, West Virginia.

My name is John Ossanna.

I'd like to welcome you to our webinar series held in partnership with the U.S. Geological

Survey of National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center.

Today's webinar is titled, "Can Prescribed Fire Help Forests Survive Drought in the Sierra

Nevada Mountains?"

Very pertinent obviously.

Also, this is the last of the drought series, so be on the lookout for the next series we're

going to be holding.

I can't believe it's already through with this.

Let's get started.

To start things off, please join me in welcoming Shawn Carter with the National Climate Change

and Wildlife Science Center who will be introducing our speaker today.

Shawn?

Shawn Carter: Great, thank you.

Thanks, everyone, for joining us today.

Yeah, it's with a little bit of a tight throat and tear in my eye that I welcome you to our

last installment of this series on ecological drought.

We have a great talk lined up today.

I'm happy to introduce Dr. James Thorne, who's adjunct faculty and research scientist at

the Department of Environmental Science and Policy at UC Davis.

He has expertise in biogeography, conservation, biology, and ecology.

Some of his recent work is focused on the success of forest thinning and tree health.

Also, vulnerability assessments for mammals, trees, and vegetation types in California.

He has his degrees in ecology from UC Davis and also degrees in geology from UC Santa

Barbara and environmental studies from UC Santa Cruz.

Without further ado, the floor is yours, James.

James Thorne: Thank you so much for the opportunity to present to the group.

Welcome to everybody online.

John, Shawn, Elda, thank you for your invitation.

We'll just dive right in.

I need to recognize my co PIs and collaborators on this project, including Phil van Mantgem

from the U.S. Geological Survey and a whole list of people that you see down there at

the bottom of this particular slide, many of whom, this work would not have been possible

without their collaboration and good help.

This presentation comes out of a project that's funded by the Southwest Climate Science Center.

We wanted to try to take advantage of the drought in California to examine whether forest

treatments led to better forest condition as the drought progressed.

As much as this is a results project, or presentation, it's probably going to be more about the project

itself because we're still in the process of developing our final results.

It's taking place in California, Sierra Nevada.

I'm sitting right now at that little Red Star over in Davis, California.

We wanted to basically see if the canopy, if we could measure tree condition to be healthier

via remote sensing in areas that had been treated versus not treated.

As you know, California's drought was a very intensive one and has led to the direct or

indirect mortality of many millions of trees.

One of the reasons that it was a more intensive drought than many of the droughts that are

in our historical record, that we can observe, is because it was much warmer.

Here you see minimum temperatures and how they really climbed during the 2013 to 2016

period, at the same time that we had remarkable decreases in the amount of precipitation.

To try to take advantage of this terrible thing, we wanted to do a large mashup of different

types of information.

This slide is really the "Here's The Progression of The Talk" slide.

We have a remote sensing component.

We have a plot based component.

We have a leaf based component, and a GIS mashup.

We want to try to combine all of those.

I'll walk you through that a bit.

I'm going to then talk about the results from a number of different spatial scales.

There are these two flight boxes in which hyper spectral data has been flown every year

for now five years going on six years, starting in 2013.

Each box is about 13,000 square kilometers.

One of them covers from the Central Valley of California up over the Sierras and the

Lake Tahoe Basin.

The other includes a transect that includes most of Yosemite National Park, as you can

see there.

At those areas, a fixed wing aircraft flew and took AVIRIS plus data, which has just

under 300 bands of record, and at 18 meters.

Here, you can see them laid out against the national forest and national parks in the

Sierras.

We wanted to try to use those data in conjunction with other types of land management that was

brought in through GIS, and in some cases with LIDAR data, to look at differences in

canopy water content in places that had been treated or not.

On this slide, you can see the yellow flight boxes.

The red are locations where we know LIDAR was flown, at one point or another, that might

be able to be used to look at structure.

On the left inset, you can see some brown and orange polygons.

Those would be representative of locations where prescribed fire or mechanical thinning

had been applied.

Those locations would represent places where, perhaps, trees might be less impacted by the

increasing ratcheting of the drought stress than in other places which had not been treated,

and therefore had a continuation of the 70 years of fire suppression and denser stands,

than we might expect otherwise.

I should jump back for just a second.

I guess it doesn't show on that one.

Three of these sites form an elevational transect that we looked at for a local level approach.

I tried to break up the landscape and our analysis approach into three spatial scales

a local level, or stand level, a mesoscale, which I'll show you in a minute, and then

a full landscape scale.

At the stand level, we looked at these three locations, the San Joaquin Experimental Range,

Soaproot Saddle which is mid elevation, and Teakettle Experimental Forest, which is getting

up into the upper elevations of conifers in the Sierra Nevada.

At Teakettle, in the upper level where it's predominantly red fir/white fir forest, there's

a 10 year, ongoing experiment that is overseen by Malcolm North of the U.S. Forest Service.

They have these 10 acre blocks.

The 10 acre blocks represent, the different colors here, represent different treatments

that have been applied.

They have three replicates for a control, or for over story thinning or understory thinning,

or prescribed burn with understory thinning or over story thinning.

We thought, "OK, here's a place where this is about as good as we can get.

We know what the prescriptions have been.

We know pretty well where these locations are, and we have LIDAR for this location.

Let's look at that in more detail."

We used it as a location to develop some of the methods for the analyses.

Here's an image of the LIDAR from those locations.

Each of these boxes has three lines in it representing the three plots at that location.

As you go to the right on the x axis, you're going to increasing height.

The vertical is the proportion of the canopy that is at that height.

The upper left understory thinning, we can see there's actually quite a bit...Even though

the understory was thinned, there's quite a bit of material to the left of the 15 meter

height line, which in this case, is shrubs that grew back.

We can see some differences.

For example, the right hand side prescribed burn with over story thinning, you don't see

a hump out to the right end, which would be where the larger tree canopies would be more

frequent.

We can see that the different treatments showed a slightly different structural profile at

this location.

This image basically is showing the combinations of three colors, or the amount of NDWI, Normalized

Difference Water Index, to NDVI.

You can see that it ratchets down from 2013 to 2015, and then each column, or each collection

of three, is a different plot with treatments.

The message that we got when we did this was that, "Yeah, we could see a loss of canopy

water by this index."

By the way, the NDWI is a unitless index.

We'll talk a little bit more about that later on.

We could see it ratcheting down, but unfortunately there was almost as much noise within the

treatments as there was among the treatments.

It was a little bit unsatisfactory with regards to we were hoping that perhaps a prescribed

burn with an understory thin would come out at losing less water overall than others.

We weren't really able to show that.

We asked, "Well, why might that be?"

We know that things have dried down.

One of the answers might be visible in this series of images.

The upper row is the location where the Teakettle Experimental Forest is located, in those red

squares.

You can see that those three images in green, the green stays about the same level of saturation.

It gets slightly paler through time, but that's telling us that this entire area is not drying

down as much as we might expect under the drought.

By contrast, the lower row, which is at our lowest elevation site in the San Joaquin Experimental

Station and it's in Oak Savannah, you can see the green is really paling out quite a

bit.

The intensity of the red in the right hand image is much heavier.

That's showing us that there's a much greater impact of decline in this index of canopy

water at that location than there was at the Teakettle location.

We came around to noticing that the Teakettle location, it sits somewhat in a topographic

bowl.

There may be some groundwater dynamics that are going on at this location that buffer

it, that essentially insulate it from the increasing effect of the drought.

Let's take a look at the mesoscale approach then.

Here's our two flight boxes.

The red and yellow little candy wrappers that are out there, since it's Halloween, those

represent locations where we tried to match places that had had a prescribed burn or a

mechanical thin that were available via GIS data with matching locations that had the

same vegetation and slope that had not been treated.

Here's what that might look like.

It's essentially a paired plot, or a paired polygon type of an analysis.

Here, in the lower image, is a burn from 2008, a prescribed burn, and nearby, not terribly

far away, a control of about the same area, same vegetation type, same elevation, similar

slope aspect.

We want to start to compare these things in some paired plot approach.

It gets a little complicated because you have prescribed burns in many different years,

and you have the image years of 2013, '14, and '15.

What we would expect to see, or our hypothesis, is illustrated in the right hand most column.

There's 2011.

You can see that there's a burn and a control column there.

We would hope that water canopy content would be...

The red shows the opposite of what we would expect.

We would hope that the prescribed burn would have a higher water canopy content than the

control.

For 2011, the control had a higher canopy water content than the burn.

If you look at the far left, it's doing more of what we would expect.

The burn has a slightly higher value than the control for each of the three years at

that location.

What this suggests is that the timing, the historical timing by year of a treatment might

have an effect on forests given the onset of a drought.

If you did a prescribed burn and, that same summer, it went into a drought, the trees

might have become somewhat stressed by the prescribed burn and be adversely impacted,

whereas perhaps, if the burn was several years prior, it would be a better solution.

We were also not terribly happy with this initial set of results from burns and treatments

because they seemed quite noisy as well.

It may be also that, because we're going across a large elevational gradient, which we'll

talk about in a moment, that the same treatments could have different health effects depending

on the level of background stress that a location is subjected to.

Now, let's move up to the landscape approach.

With the landscape approach, we learned that it takes a long time to process hyper spectral

imagery to be at the point where you can look across pixels from year to year and have the

same 18 meter pixels lining up across 13,000 square kilometers.

Indeed, you can see here, there are flight lines.

There's about 11 or 12 flight lines in each box.

We had to take each flight line, which was geo referenced by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory,

but we had to further geo reference them by cutting each flight line into small pieces,

locking it onto the landscape, and then locking the years from one to the next.

At the landscape scale, there's some things that I see that make me confident that we

could use these data at this spatial scale.

The first is on the left image here.

You can see that down in the valley at the bottom of the box, the canopy water index

for a single year is drier in browns and reds.

It moves into blue colors in our conifer zone, which is a more productive and moister zone.

As you get to the other side of the Sierras and into Nevada, past Lake Tahoe, you can

see that it dries down again.

The major moisture gradient of these mountains is captured by these images.

On the right hand image, in the back behind those three flight lines, is the vegetation

map for this area derived from other satellite imagery.

The patterns that we see in the hyper spectral imagery and the patterns of the vegetation

line up very well.

That also suggests to me that we could do things.

We could look at this by different vegetation type, different forest type.

We go from oak savannas to mixed conifer hardwood to conifers, to sub alpine conifers.

We could probably look at all of those in turn, and see what type of dynamics they display.

Here's what one of our rendered images of the multiple flight lines looks like for,

what I call, the Tahoe Box.

The nice thing about the NDWI is, although it's unitless, we've tried to address that,

I'll present that in a minute, it does allow you to compare from one location to another

and across years, because it's all on a single index.

Here's the change from 2013 to 2015.

The tannish color shows the drying down.

There's some speckling in that.

The white locations are places where there was cloud or snow cover, and we weren't

able to calculate the differences for those particular combination of years.

Here's the same image again, now with some of the wildfires for this region overlaid

on it.

What you can see here is where the intense red is located on the left side of this image,

is the King Fire.

The King Fire took place during this sequence.

Some of the greatest drying down are within the footprint of that wildfire.

We can start to bring in things like the wildfires, perhaps other disturbances, and look at them

in relationship to these types of data.

Now we switch over to the Yosemite Box.

You can see Mono Lake in the upper right hand side.

Here's the 2014 and 2015 images side by side.

The stars are the field locations.

We're going to come back to those in a minute.

You can see that the band of blue above that heavy red in the left image is paling out

and getting much less pronounced by 2015.

That would be the increasing sequence of the drought.

Here's the change in canopy water content.

We can see that almost the entire location is moving into drier condition, rather than

into wetter condition.

Again, I've put the prescribed fires on there with the crosshatch black locations.

They match up pretty well with the heavy duty red emerging locations.

One of the things that we're planning to do with these data are to develop a topographic

model.

There's a scientist named Jenifer Cartwright who works for the U.S. Geological Survey.

She is using these types of imagery along with topographic modeling to try to identify

where refugia are located on the landscape within the drought.

We think we can do that here.

We could either create a topographic model not using any of these data, but say, "Here's

where we think the refuge, the least impacted locations will be for each vegetation type,

and then look at the change in the canopy water index at those locations."

Or we could actually use the imagery to say where are the locations that had the least

impact and go in and look at what conditions are at those locations.

That's currently the major thrust of the research.

I've talked about the remote sensing and the three scales of analysis, but we've also tried

to address the issue that the NDWI is unitless, and it would be nice to know that the millimeters

of water in the canopy were.

While we were doing this project, we originally were only going to process three years, but

we learned that NASA decided to fly the imagery again in 2016, and indeed they're actually

going for another several years.

In 2016, we fielded a field campaign to get out on the ground and try to collect

information about leaf water potential and field measurements of the spectral indices

of trees so that we could come up with a canopy water content that was derived in the field

at the same time that the planes were doing the over flights.

We could link the values from the field to the remotely sensed ones and that that would

get us to getting to some actual measurement of the canopy water content.

Here are some of the folks who worked on that project.

We collected from these four sites in June of 2016.

The Blodgett Forest, the San Joaquin, Teakettle, and Soaproot.

Notice all of the tree mortality at the Soaproot level elevation.

Those are an elevational transect.

We collected leaf reflectants, leaf water content, leaf mass, leaf thickness, water

potential from pre dawn and midday, and at the leaf level and at the canopy level, leaf

area index, canopy cover or gap fractions, and species and tree data.

We would lay out a nine unit plot.

Within that, three plots would be selected and four dominant trees would be measured

in each of those locations.

I'm going to talk a little bit about the three elevational locations, starting at the San

Joaquin Experimental Range, which is the lowest elevation one.

Here we have two species of oaks, the blue oak and valley oak, and the lowest elevation

pine.

We can see that the water potential versus the leaf water content of the pine and the

oaks are quite different.

Also, the leaf water content against the normalized difference water index as measured in the

field is also quite different.

This is the location at which our results are the most far along.

Leaf water content against the NDWI is showing less of a distinct pattern.

For the oaks, we can actually identify...our three different plots show us that topographic

position is an important consideration for the condition of the canopy of those trees.

You can see these three groups are broken out here, and that they have different topographic

position.

We were able to use that with some repeat plot data to identify mortality that is associated

with the drying down of the remote sensing.

The little red circles here are showing you the nine locations that we have repeated field

measurements for, and then the imagery.

There is a fairly good correspondence between the percentage of dead trees and the canopy

water decrease that is shown in the statistical chart.

This is particularly of interest at the low elevation in these blue oaks, because blue

oaks may have, they probably have, less pathogens and pests that are attacking them than is

occurring at higher elevations.

At higher elevations, the predominant cause of the mortality has been beetle outbreaks.

It's hard to get to a direct physiological link to mortality, but at this lowest elevation,

in the hottest, driest places, we think that we might be closer to identifying the physiological

tolerance of these trees.

We jump up to the middle elevation.

Here, there's five different species, and they array themselves pretty well with regards

to water potential and leaf water content.

They also break out fairly well of leaf water content against the handheld NDWI.

In this case, we might be able to go after dynamics with the individual trees.

However our 18 meter pixel of the over flight is still a little bit coarse for being able

to extract out individual species from the canopy as has been done successfully in the

leaf to landscape project that the Sequoia National Park and Professor Greg Aznar have

done in the southern Sierras.

We can identify that the oaks and the ponderosa pine are really quite different with their

LWC and NDWI.

At the highest elevation, this is getting up into the Teakettle, you can see the species

are quite mixed with their leaf water potential in NDWI.

This is perhaps emblematic at the site level of some of the problems that we were running

into with regards to the noise within the plots by treatment being as high as the noise

between the plots on 10 year old treatments.

We do see that the incense cedar, the CADE, is perhaps the most differentiated, those

purple dots going off to the left.

While the individual site results, to my mind, leave something to be desired, when we put

them all together, we do find that the leaf water content versus the spectral indices

of the species from the San Joaquin and the Soaproot and the Teakettle can track fairly

well between a leaf water content of grams per cm squared and the NDWI values.

This does revert back to the concept that at the landscape scale, we have a fairly robust

measure.

If we had more data, we might be able to get better estimates of the actual leaf water

content in the canopy.

That's perhaps another step in future research here.

While I've mentioned a number of things that are still in progress, Phil Van Mantgem, who

is a co PI on this project, has some results from long term demographic data that I would

like to bring to your attention.

These are locations that have been measured, I think, quite a few times, and pre and post

fire.

Here's what the stand density looks like when you stratify by those values, and the probability

of death being lower in burn stands after accounting for tree size and groups.

You can see that the probability declines for the pines after the prescribed fire in

these demographic plots.

Contrary to the results from Teakettle, here we're seeing that perhaps these fires are

beneficial in trying to insulate the pines from the ongoing drought.

Jumping back now to the GIS data for just a few more ideas of our next steps.

We have stand treatments, we have climate data and models, we have environmental data,

and building those into a landscape model and using the remote sensing to try to validate

that, or using the remote sensing to build the model and then trying to translate it

over to perhaps landsat are steps that we would like to take next.

There's other data.

Here's a view of the 2016 tree mortality surveys, the aerial surveys, the ADS surveys, which

also occur in Oregon and Washington and many parts of the United States flown by the Forest

Service.

In California, they're a combined state and federal initiative.

Here in the background is a change in climatic water deficit.

This is a GIS model that we produced here.

The change from a standard 30 year average to the average of the 2013 to 2015 drought,

that's the red to blue in the background, and then the black is the level of tree mortality,

conifer mortality that has occurred.

You can see that there are, in the Southern Sierra, down at the bottom of the image, the

black is occurring in some of the reddest locations, and the black just south of lake

Tahoe is occurring in less intensively drought stricken areas, and perhaps, there may be

a difference in the proportion of trees killed by beetles versus by direct physiological

impacts between those two areas.

This could be a way that we could start to identify different types of impacts in different

locations.

Finally, here's that same climatic water deficit change in the background for the whole Sierra

Nevada, and here are our two flight lines with the change in canopy water content between

2013 and 2015.

Looking to see how we might be able to link, or how good is the correspondence between

the loss of canopy water index as measured through our hyper spectral, and a model of

landscape hydrology and the change in the background hydrology could be another way

that we might be able to get into predictive modeling about future levels of physiological

stress on these different tree species or on these different vegetation types, I should

say.

Now, a lot of this was censored on the hypothesis that if we are able to somehow reintroduce

a land management techniques like prescribed burning to large areas, that those areas would

become more resilient to these types of perturbations.

Of course, there will be barriers to those that can include the funding, and in California,

air quality is a big issue because state air quality agencies regulate how much federal

forest lands are permitted to burn.

The timing of the burning, the site accessibility, rough terrain is often…cannot be treated.

Prescribed fire may not be sufficiently severe and hotter the droughts may produce stresses

that exceed the potential management responses.

These are some of the management challenges and questions.

I'd like to leave you then with, perhaps, a framework for how we're thinking about all

of these, that we have forest plots with the water potential in remote sensing by experimental

sites or remote sensing in landscape samples, landscape levels, GIS integrations.

I talked a bit about those.

There's fire suppression, no treatment, prescribed burns, mechanical fitting, are there other

techniques that we might be able to use?

What trend information is critical?

What condition information is important? and what future projections would be needed to

pull those together?

Finally, the bottom box of some other questions, what experimental treatments, and at what

scale, and what monitoring would ratchet forward our understanding so that we don't merely

look at the response of perturbations or the projections of future impact.

We try to integrate those so that we have a way to advance our understanding even when

management techniques might not do what we would hope they would do.

With that, I'll thank you for your attention and take any questions that may be out there.

John: Thank you, Jim.

I see a few people typing away.

I just want to say real quick, thank you for the presentation.

I also like to thank USGS for continuing these webinars series with us in the last 10 months

with this particular drought specific series.

I want to thank everybody there, Holly, Kate, and Shawn and everyone who's participated

in this and help put this on.

We will be taking a two month break.

Be on lookout for future webinars.

We have another series that we're planning right now.

We got our first question from Johnny.

"Did you see any interaction with times since burn and drought effects in terms of mortality

response?"

James: We mostly have been trying to look at the flip side of that, and the flip side

would be the idea of resilience or locations that had less impact.

There are some publications that are out there for sure.

I'm going to back up.

Here's the mortality as measured across the state.

Greg Asner has a nice paper in PNAS where they made projections about mortality, and

these aerial detection surveys from the forest service, the annual tree mortality that the

2016 says 102 million trees.

It's probably surpassed that now.

The great majority of those died by insect.

I would say, we don't have a good measure of that, but we recognize that we need it

because the NDWI can be saturated by, or can be affected by the number of trees that are

actually in a pixel or the proportion of a pixel that is in a green, similar to NDVI.

We recognize that that is a potentially confounding factor in these measurements.

John: If anybody's on the phone line, if you like to throw out a question, you can

press *6 on your phone and that should unmute you, if you have any questions.

Toni Lyn: Hey, James.

This is Toni Lyn.

Great to hear this work.

I was just wondering if you could talk a little bit more about any signs of fire refugia that

you found.

There's really neat work happening in the Pacific Northwest on this.

Maybe you just know about, in general, what is being seen in the state even not just from

your work.

James: Fire refugia?

Toni Lyn: Yeah.

Thinking about not just managing places so they don't burn as much, but places that are

naturally not burning as much.

Do we put our prescribed burns there or think about putting them elsewhere in fact?

James: Yeah.

Great question.

Good to hear your voice.

We're interested in the work that is here, these resources.

One of the things we learned last thanksgiving, almost a year ago now, from a stakeholder

meeting was that, "Hey, wow, if you can just create the entire flight box and give us four

years of consecutive June values that we might be able to explore various different applications

of these hyper spectral data."

That's been one of the main focuses, and going after refugia in that location is something

that we're interested to do starting from a climatic perspective.

From a perspective of are there places that seem to have just had less canopy moisture

loss than others, and what are the physical characteristics of those places because that

will be, of course, interacting with the management of those locations.

If we can do that by veg type, then we might be able to identify some fire refugia.

Fire is keenly on the minds of people in California.

It's quite smokey outside here in Davis today even though the coastal fires have died down

now a bit.

The combination of four years of drought and then double precip that brought the thatch

up in many of our more arid systems, so there was a huge annual fuel load that was out there

and then very dry conditions have led to some of the sweeping wildfires that have been in

the news.

Those types of combinations in California, it makes me wonder whether, perhaps, we're

moving out of our models of gradual climate change and the increasing stress that that

brings, and into some of the more stochastic events that are broadly predicted under climate

change.

Four years of drought and then double rain and then an extremely dry and fire season

and high winds, those things within a five, six year period seem to be pointing us to

those greater extremes.

One thing that I am interested to do is to try to look for spatial correspondence between

measures of, say, future climate exposure like some of the climate exposure maps that

we've developed in California, lay those over the annual maps and, say, what was the 2016,

2017 year, what did that look like relative to our projections into the future of increasing

stress?

Was 2016-17 the equivalent of a mean condition in 2050 or something like that.

We might be able to start to get a handle on what some of these outlier conditions bring

to us.

I guess, you could say that the places that retain the most canopy moisture might become

the fire refugia, but we could go around on that one in a couple of different directions.

Toni Lyn: Totally.

Thanks.

There's just…Meg and some others up in the Northwest, they're thinking about this in

a way that's very different than I think about climate change refugia, but taking into account

topography and then looking at historical data to see places that have remained unburned,

and then what's the pattern there.

It's cool.

Maybe, we can all join forces or something.

[laughs] James: That would be great.

I'd love to work with Meg and with you.

Thanks so much for the question.

Toni Lyn: Thanks, Jim.

John: Thanks, Tony.

Alright, I don't see questions in the chat box.

Once again, I'd like to thank Mr. Thorne for your presentation and, like I said, it will

be available shortly on the USGS website.

Be on the lookout for that if you guys know somebody that didn't have the chance to view

this.

Thank you very much for participating.

Have a good day.

James: Great, thank you, sir.

For more infomation >> Can Prescribed Fire Help Forests Survive Drought in the Sierra Nevadas - Duration: 45:23.

-------------------------------------------

Can We Become Strangers? | 남이 될 수 있을까 [Gag Concert / 2017.11.04] - Duration: 4:40.

(Can We Become Strangers?)

- Hello. / - Welcome.

You're by yourself today.

What about your boyfriend?

We broke up.

Oh, I'm sorry.

That's alright.

I thought I'd be fine

but it's hard to forget.

- Give me a stiff drink. / - Sure.

Here you go.

This is Jonghyeok's favorite drink.

- Keep this here under his name. / - Sure.

- Hello. / - Hi.

Oh, your girlfriend came by alone yesterday...

Oh, you broke up...

Sora came by yesterday?

Yes... I'm sorry.

That's okay.

- I'll have my usual. / - Sure.

Oh... Sora left this behind under your name.

Sora's still so...

That'll be $170.

Pardon?

She left the bill for you too.

She's still such a pain! Man!

Geez!

Pay before you drink.

I didn't drink anything.

Oh, this song...

Sora really liked this song.

I miss her.

Sir...

Thank you.

May I get a napkin?

Here you go.

Boy, that hit the spot!

Boilermakers are the best!

I bet Sora still gets sad when she hears this song.

She started getting drunk.

She hasn't changed.

Hey, Sora.

You're still feeling sorry for yourself here?

I'll set you up with a guy!

Forget it! I'm not interested.

But he's supposed to come here now!

I said I'm not interested.

- Hello. / - Hello.

You're really cute.

I have to go to the military. See you.

Salute!

You were already discharged!

I guess I drank too much.

I'd better go before I mess up again.

- Good-bye. / - Good-bye.

Hey... Sora, your bag...

I sure miss Sora.

Excuse me...

Sora left this bag behind yesterday.

- I guess she was really drunk last night. / - Yes.

What's this? A pork hock?

What is this?

What the... A karaoke remote?

How wasted did she get? Hold on...

Hold on...

Why does she have a grill?

What is this?

This is...

This is a crime!

She took the call bell at the bar too.

Geez, Sora... Unbelievable...

Did he come by today?

He just left.

I guess I'll have a drink with my friend.

Okay.

Come on in.

I said to come in!

That was in front of the bar.

Why would you make him stand out in the cold?

Have a seat. Sit.

Let's have a drink!

Gosh, you have long legs.

By any chance...

Did Sora stop by last night?

Yes. She was really drunk last night

and forgot to pay the bill.

- I'll pay for that. / - Sure.

Here. $40.

This is lettuce.

Hold on, hold on!

Hold on...

Hold on...

For more infomation >> Can We Become Strangers? | 남이 될 수 있을까 [Gag Concert / 2017.11.04] - Duration: 4:40.

-------------------------------------------

Making Friends - Jack Marshall Can't Do This - Webseries - Episode 17 - Duration: 6:39.

It's too quiet. After I was laid out in the cellar, everything just settled down.

There's no trespassers on camera.

No rearranging in my room. No bumps in the night.

I don't like it.

I'm still trying to crack this riddle I found, but I can't make heads or tails of it.

And, to be perfectly honest, I'm having to play offense and defense at the same time, so I need some help.

I mean, I guess I have Donni. But she's not actually here, so that's not the same thing.

Sorry, Donni. No offense.

House is at best a suspect.

And as for Morgan, I just need visual confirmation that he's been breaking into my house several times a week.

Oh, I'm also pretty sure that he's the one that's responsible for this headache

that I've been enjoying lately.

I need someone here that I can trust.

Which is why, as weird as this sounds, I'm interviewing for new friends.

But I really only have one possible candidate, so, let's hope that it works out.

Hey!

[O.S.] Hey, Jack.

Oh, please, come on in.

Thanks for coming Reverend.

Oh, call me Paul. This was on your step.

The weather calls for rain later so I didn't want it to get soaked.

Clergy and a postmaster. Do you fix broken windows as well?

Sorry, I don't, actually.

Oh, is this more tribute footage?

[O.S.] Uh, no, I do video blogs.

Oh, okay. Am I interrupting?

[O.S.] No, actually I was gonna see if you wanted to help.

Me?

[O.S.] Yeah, it gets kind of boring when it's just me all the time.

I can turn it off if you want.

No, no, no it's it's fine.

You know I was actually, I was thinking about the memorial.

You were?

Yeah, I was going to offer you the sanctuary at the school if you want it.

Wow, that's really nice, Paul. Thank you.

Um, I was thinking about doing it here, though.

Oh, of course.

I would love for you to speak, though.

Yeah, I mean, at your Aunt's Memorial?

Mmhmm, do like a sermon or whatever they're called.

Yeah, yeah, of course. I will.

I mean I'd love to. I mean, that'd be wonderful - -

Great. Sorry, I didn't actually invite you over to talk about the memorial, though.

Oh, you didn't?

No. How well do you know this house?

Um, well, I knew your aunt very well.

I mean, we were good friends.

I wasn't here often but probably more than most.

What can you tell me about it that I don't know.

Ah, you've heard the rumors.

Gold bars in the mattresses.

Rubies in the bathroom.

Diamonds in the cellar.

Are they true?

I don't think anybody knows the answers to that question.

Ah, well, I intend to find out.

Okay, well, your Aunt Josette, she actually had a lot of changes around here.

They were bringing in construction crews here all the time.

But none of the companies I recognized.

Oh, did she ever tell you any riddles?

Ones like about, I don't know, like a bow and arrow?

No, I don't, I don't think so. Why you think you think it's a clue?

I don't know.

See, Paul, I'm gonna be honest with you.

There is a race on right now to figure out what's inside this house

and I don't know who I'm up against.

I need an ally. Someone I can trust.

You think you can help me?

Yeah, I could help you. What do you, what do you need?

Oh, basically just don't break in and sneak around.

I have a very low bar for friendship.

Seriously? You have a prowler?

I'm afraid so.

Any idea who it is?

No, I'm just trying to find confirmation.

Have you called the police?

Mmm-hmm, no. I don't intend to.

I feel like the less they know the better. I think.

Okay, so no breaking and entering.

Okay, anything else?

This house is really old,

and I'm trying to get my hands on some blueprints

to see if I can see anything that sticks out.

But they've been lost along the way.

Now, the county clerk has a copy,

but it's outside my quarantine. So.

You know, it's strange. Arthur should have them. Have you asked him yet?

You know Arthur?

Yeah, I mean he's - -

He's a tool?

Well, we're all God's children.

Morgan is a good friend of his.

He's the handyman around here.

He's his friend?

Yeah, maybe you've seen him around?

I most certainly have.

I knew Arthur hired him but I didn't know that they were that close.

Yeah, now Arthur has a summer house here now,

so, he and Morgan are thick as thieves whenever he comes to visit.

Oh, see? You are such a big help already!

Okay...

In any case, I'll help you find those blueprints.

Great. -And I'll let you know what I find.

Thanks, Paul.

Yeah, if you need anything, call me anytime.

I will.

Okay.

Are you hungry?

Yeah.

Great. House made some stew. I think it's mutton.

I've never had a mutton before but it's worth a try.

Yeah, I'll give it a shot.

Cool. House!

I have a friend. I have one friend. Hey!

Paul's great and it's gonna be a huge help having him on my side.

And Morgan has entered this house for the last time.

Legitimately, at least.

Well, actually I don't know if I can fire him.

Can I fire him, Pete?

But I'm going to anyway.

Oh!

I wonder what this could be?

All the parts from Donni already came in.

"Because it's not Halloween without candy corn." -M

Well, it looks like I have two friends now.

For more infomation >> Making Friends - Jack Marshall Can't Do This - Webseries - Episode 17 - Duration: 6:39.

-------------------------------------------

Manchester City plotting to hijack Juventus move for Liverpool's Emre Can | News Now transfer | #LFC - Duration: 2:05.

The German is out of contract next summer and it is highly unlikely that he'll be

signing a new deal at Anfield.

He's been heavily linked with a move to the Serie A champions, who had an offer for

the 23-year-old rejected in the summer transfer window.

But according to Calciomercato, Pep Guardiola is keeping tabs on the situation and is keen

to bring him to the Etihad.

Can has played 14 times for the Reds this season, scoring three times, and scored his

first international goal against Azerbaijan last month.

Jurgen Klopp may look to sell him in January to avoid losing him for free, but Juventus

chief executive Beppe Marotta has ruled out an early move.

"We don't think we are going to make a big signing in January," he told Premium Sport

in October.

"Our team is absolutely competitive and we have some very interesting midfielders like

Rodrigo Bentancur who has already showed his qualities.

"We have faith in this team and in these lads.

As for Emre Can I don't think Liverpool will sell him in January.

"We made an offer for him in the summer but the Reds didn't sell him so I don't think

they'll change their mind in the middle of the season."

Can is not the only player that Guardiola is hoping to pick up for nothing in the summer,

as City continue to monitor Alexis Sanchez' contract situation at Arsenal.

The Gunners travel to Manchester tomorrow as City look to extend their five point lead

at the top of

the table.

For more infomation >> Manchester City plotting to hijack Juventus move for Liverpool's Emre Can | News Now transfer | #LFC - Duration: 2:05.

-------------------------------------------

Danmachi ~ I can't - Duration: 0:35.

Are you okay?

I'm going to be saved?

I can't let Aiz Wallenstein save me...

again!

For more infomation >> Danmachi ~ I can't - Duration: 0:35.

-------------------------------------------

171104 BTS Jimin said "Sorry' and can not dancing in many song @ Wings Tour in Macau - Duration: 7:44.

For more infomation >> 171104 BTS Jimin said "Sorry' and can not dancing in many song @ Wings Tour in Macau - Duration: 7:44.

-------------------------------------------

Hakan Akkus - I Can't Be (Drop G & Regard Remix) - Duration: 6:07.

Hakan Akkus - I Can't Be (Drop G & Regard Remix)

For more infomation >> Hakan Akkus - I Can't Be (Drop G & Regard Remix) - Duration: 6:07.

-------------------------------------------

You can never be smarter than your parents Zaidalit-Zaid ali and Shahveer jafry new funny video 2017 - Duration: 1:48.

FUNNY VIDEO

ZAID ALIT AND SHAHVEER JAFRY

For more infomation >> You can never be smarter than your parents Zaidalit-Zaid ali and Shahveer jafry new funny video 2017 - Duration: 1:48.

-------------------------------------------

Can Holly Tandy impress with Tori Kelly track Live Shows The X Factor 2017( the lyrics ) - Duration: 2:20.

Please, like, subscribe, share

Please, like

Please, like, subscribe, share

For more infomation >> Can Holly Tandy impress with Tori Kelly track Live Shows The X Factor 2017( the lyrics ) - Duration: 2:20.

-------------------------------------------

Can Cal Students Find Happiness During Midterms? - Duration: 2:23.

Hi guys, it's Esme from CalTV Entertainment

and I'm out here on Sproul today to find

a little bit of happiness during midterm season

So what are you happy about during midterm season?

I actually just saw Oprah on campus, she did a speech the other day

on uh, Africa and schools out there that she's building

Uh, are you serious?

Absolutely not, Oprah did not come to Berkeley

How are your midterms going right now?

Aw, man

I'm extremely happy because Riverdale is coming back on Wednesday

so that's gonna keep me going through the midterm season

Is that the one with Zach and Cody? Like the actors?

Yeah, it is!

It's Cole Sprouse, he looks very different now

So what are you happy about midterm season?

I'm really happy about just playing video games all day

Nice! That's the life.

I'm happy about staying in Moffitt for 24 hours a day

and studying until like I can finally retain all the information I learned

Awesome, so you basically live in Moffitt?

Yeah, pretty much

So what are you happy about during midterm season?

I'm really excited because I'm normally crying alone

and during midterm season it's a lot more socially acceptable to cry

and I can do it with groups of people

so that's really awesome

That's pretty solid, what are your favorite place to cry on campus?

My favorite place to cry on campus is actually one of the bathroom stalls in MLK

because nobody goes into that bathroom

it's really private

So what are you happy about during midterm season?

I'm happy that I finally get to go to a concert tonight

I'm gonna go see The Weeknd

and it's exciting I don't have to like stress out or

put a pause on studying, because I get to live my life

That's awesome, what's your favorite Weeknd song?

Ummmm...

No, why'd you put me on the spot like that?

So what makes you happy during midterm season?

Well, I get to have volleyball practice every morning

so that keeps me going during the midterm season

Nice, what team do you play on?

I play on the beach volleyball team

Oooh, and what position are you?

Well, you actually do everything, cause there's only two people

So you gotta do it all!

Do you know what midterms are?

No

What are you happy about during midterm season?

I hope that brought you a little bit of happiness

Once again, I'm Esme from CalTV Entertainment

And now, it's time to get back to studying

Hope you have a great time!

For more infomation >> Can Cal Students Find Happiness During Midterms? - Duration: 2:23.

-------------------------------------------

How Much Damage Can A Hydrogen Bomb Do? - Duration: 4:47.

Hello and welcome back to Life's Biggest Questions, I'm Ron McKenzie-Lefurgey.

Well, North Korea is at it again, this time claiming to have successfully tested a hydrogen

bomb that could be loaded onto an intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM.

If this is true, it's certainly a matter of concern for leaders around the world; with

nuclear weapons mounted on long-range missiles, North Korea becomes significantly more dangerous.

How much more?

Let's discuss.

Throw on your hazmat suit, it's time to answer the question: How much damage can a

hydrogen bomb do?

Hydrogen bombs, otherwise known as thermonuclear bombs, are incredibly powerful, much more

so than atomic nuclear weapons.

The first test of an h-bomb was done in the United States, which produced an explosion

the equivalent of 10,400 kilotonnes of TNT.

To put this in perspective, this is over 450 times more powerful than Fat Man, the bomb

dropped on Nagasaki in 1945.

Needless to say, Hydrogen bombs are a force to be reckoned with.

What makes Hydrogen bombs different from atomic bombs?

Well, while both involve a nuclear reaction, the reaction within is rather different.

Atomic bombs rely solely on nuclear fission, splitting one atom into two smaller ones to

create energy.

Hydrogen bombs, on the other hand, mainly utilize fusion to create power, merging multiple

atoms into a large one, similar to how stars form, with fission being used to set the reaction

off.

This allows for much more compact warheads, which in turn makes it easier to mount hydrogen

bombs onto ICBMs.

Since North Korea's biggest technological issue was finding a way to mount their nukes

onto ICBMs, this development makes it much more likely that they will find a way, and

suddenly have the capacity to launch nuclear weapons much greater distances.

Just how much damage can they do with these bombs?

Well, as stated earlier, some of the most powerful h-bombs have yielded tens of thousands

of kilottones.

The most powerful was the Tsar Bomba, an h-bomb made by the Soviets that yielded a whopping

50 megatons, or 50,000 kilotons, worth of TNT.

This would be enough to wipe whole cities off the map.

However, the bombs we're seeing out of North Korea are significantly less powerful than

these super destructive bombs.

In terms of this bomb in particular, there is a bit that we know.

North Korea has issued statements on it, but it should be noted that these must be taken

with heaping spoonfuls of salt; North Korea is known to have a bark worse than their bite.

It's claimed that their h-bomb produced roughly 100 kilotons, which is 10 times stronger

than the test from last year.

This is enough to create a fireball 1km in diameter, with a thermal radiation radius

of 3.9km.

If detonated in a major city, the death toll could reach the tens or even hundreds of thousands,

with just a single bomb.

North Korea also claims that this bomb has the capability to be detonated at high altitudes,

allowing it to be used to send out electromagnetic pulses, or EMPs, to take out power and communications

in a certain area.

If true, this could be used in conjunction with other weapons to incredible, and devastating,

effect.

Perhaps the most terrifying implication of this is that this is just the beginning.

Considering just how powerful hydrogen bombs can be, it's very possible that North Korea

could develop bombs that yield 10s of thousands of kilotons of power in the next decade.

Should this become a reality, it would be difficult for governments around the world

to ignore the threat from North Korea.

But one big question remains on everyone's minds: do they really have this stuff?

North Korea is rather well-known for their propaganda and liberal use of… alternative

facts.

The miniaturization of a nuclear warhead is something North Korea has been struggling

with for some time.

Considering how behind the times the country has been technologically, there's a rather

significant chance that this talk of a hydrogen bomb mounted on an ICBM is simply that; talk.

With Donald Trump, current president of the United States, launching threats and baiting

North Korea, it's certainly possible that this is just an empty threat on the part of

North Korea.

But nothing is certain, and with the safety of the world depending on it, assumptions

can be a dangerous thing.

So now we return to our question: How much damage can a hydrogen bomb do?

If we're looking throughout history and across the globe, things look rather dire.

Hydrogen bombs can deal absurd amounts of damage in a single blast; one well-aimed strike

could take out just about all of Manhattan.

However, North Korea doesn't have access to weapons of this magnitude, with all evidence

pointing to bombs that yield roughly 100 kilotonnes.

While that isn't enough to level a major city, the casualties would certainly be high,

possibly in the hundreds of thousands.

That is, if they even HAVE these weapons.

However, in the years to come, we will need to remain vigilant, in case technological

advances allow them to increase their power even further.

Thank you for watching life's Biggest Questions.

I hope this was interesting and informative, and perhaps led you to look into it further

on your own.

If you enjoyed this video, please like and subscribe to the channel down below.

And heck, while you're down there, let me know what you think about North Korea.

Do they have these weapons, or are they just trying to fool us all?

I look forward to reading your thoughts.

Until next time, I'm Ron McKenzie-Lefurgey with Life's Biggest Questions, wishing you

the best of luck, on your quest for answers.

For more infomation >> How Much Damage Can A Hydrogen Bomb Do? - Duration: 4:47.

-------------------------------------------

Elton John - Can You Feel the Love Tonight (From "The Lion King"/Official Video) - Duration: 4:07.

For more infomation >> Elton John - Can You Feel the Love Tonight (From "The Lion King"/Official Video) - Duration: 4:07.

-------------------------------------------

Can't Defend Your Trickle-Down Economics? Change The Subject! - Duration: 10:43.

THE REPUBLICAN TAX PLAN HAS BEEN REVEALED IN THE EARLY POLLS

I'VE SEEN HAVE IT AT LOWER THAN 33% APPROVAL, REPUBLICANS ON DAY

ONE HAVE THEIR WORK CUT OUT FOR THEM.

LET'S SEE HOW THEY DO WHEN

FACED WITH SOME FAIRLY OBVIOUS SURFACE LEVEL CRITICISMS

LIKE IN THIS CLIP.

>>THE BOTTOM LINE IS 18.6 IS WHAT COMPANIES REALLY PAY

BUT IF THEY GOT A DEDUCTION BECAUSE AT 20

OF MEANS THEY WILL PAY LESS, IF THEY GOT THAT DEDUCTION HOW

DOES IT MAKE IT INTO PEOPLE'S POCKETS OTHER THAN SHAREHOLDERS?

>>WE ARE CLOSING LOOPHOLES AND CUTTING SPECIAL INTEREST TEXT

INDUCTIONS.

>>PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION, THE DIRECT QUESTION, BECAUSE

WHEN IT COMES TO CORPORATE TAXES YOU AREN'T ACTUALLY CLOSING ANY

OF THE LOOPHOLES, YOU WERE JUST LOWERING THE RATE, SO THOSE

CORPORATIONS WILL STILL BE ABLE TO EMPLOY ALL THE LOOPHOLES AND

ESSENTIALLY PAY EVEN LESS, HOW IS CUTTING --

>>THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO USE THOSE LOOPHOLES, WE ARE

TAKING THE LOOPHOLES OUT OF IT.

>>THE ONLY LOOPHOLE I SAW WAS ELIMINATING DEDUCTIONS FOR

ENTERTAINMENT EXPENSES.

>>WE ARE CLOSING LOBBYIST LOOPHOLES, DOING AWAY WITH

SPECIAL INTEREST TAX DEDUCTIONS.

>>SPECIFICALLY --

>>MORE

FAIR, MORE SIMPLE, I'M TELLING YOU A LOT OF THOSE DEDUCTIONS

AND LOOPHOLES, WE ARE CLOSING THOSE, WE ARE SIMPLIFYING THIS.

>>PLEASE TELL ME ONE CORPORATE LOOPHOLE YOU ARE CLOSING.

>>WE ARE CLOSING MORE THAN ONE.

>>GIVE ME A SPECIFIC ONE, SIR.

>>THIS WILL SIMPLIFY OUR TAX SYSTEM.

>>I'M ASKING FOR A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OF A LOOPHOLE.

>>THIS BILL STILL HAS TO BE MARKED UP BUT THE FRAMEWORK THAT

HAS BEEN ROLLED OUT SHOWS US WHAT WE WILL BE LOOKING AT, THIS

IS WHAT THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE IS WORKING ON AND

MARKING UP, WHAT WE WILL BE VOTING ON THE FOUR THINGS

GIVING.

I CAN ASSURE YOU THIS IS MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE GOT NOW.

>>THAT WAS AWESOME.

I HEAR YOU, WE ARE CLOSING ALL THE

LOOPHOLES.

GOOD, GIVE ME ONE.

>>I WILL GIVE YOU MORE THAN ONE.

LATER.

>>THIS IS HOW THE REST OF THE INTERVIEW WENT, LET'S WATCH.

>>SHE TRIED, SHE HAD GOOD AIM.

>>NICE 26-YEAR-OLD REFERENCE.

>>IS IT THAT OLD?

>>WHERE IS THIS REFERENCE IS TOO SOON.

>>IF NOT GOOD BECAUSE HE SHOT BACK.

>>THEY AREN'T CLOSING ANY OF THE CORPORATE LOOPHOLES.

IT'S

AMAZING, THE ENTERTAINMENT LOOPHOLE IS LIKE NOTHING, $38.

THEY SAID THE WHOLE POINT OF TAX REFORM IS THESE AREN'T TAX CUTS,

THIS IS TAX REFORM.

WE MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT, YES IT APPEARS

WE WILL LOWER THE TAX RATE TREMENDOUSLY FOR CORPORATIONS

FROM 35 TO 20%, THAT'S A RECORD-BREAKING CUT, BUT IT'S

OKAY BECAUSE WE WILL CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES.

THEY DIDN'T, IT COMES

OUT TO TRILLIONS IN TAX CUTS FOR CORPORATIONS AND THEY

DIDN'T CLOSE THE LOOPHOLES.

>>ALSO IF IT'S GOING TO BE THE SAME THING, WHY ARE YOU DOING

AT?

IF YOUR BIG ARGUMENT IS WE WILL DO THIS BIG TAX REFORM BILL

AND IT WILL BE THE SAME IN THE END, DON'T BOTHER.

>>YOU WILL SEE WHY AND THE NEXT CLIP.

I KNOW IT IS A DIFFERENT

THING BUT IN TERMS OF LOOPHOLES THEY DIDN'T JUST NOT CLOSE THEM,

THEY ARE KILLING THE ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX WHICH IS DESIGNED TO

STOP PEOPLE FROM USING LOOPHOLES.

>>THAT'S A GREAT POINT, JOHN.

>>I TRY.

THE CONCERN IS THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE A

MASSIVE OVERALL TAX CUT, WE KNOW WHAT THAT IS, IT'S TRICKLE-DOWN

ECONOMICS ALL OVER AGAIN.

WATCH SOME MORE DODGING, AND YOU WILL GET AN ANSWER TO YOUR

QUESTION OF WHY DO THIS AT ALL?

>>THE BUSH TAX CUTS DIDN'T RESULT IN GROWTH OR HIGHER

WAGES, WHY ARE YOU CERTAIN THIS WILL BE DIFFERENT?

>>FIRST AND I JUST COMMENT, DID THE SPEAKER SOUND LIKE A FORMER

CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS?

I KNOW YOU WERE GETTING RAMPED UP.

>>THAT WAS AWESOME ON 18 DIFFERENT GROUNDS.

ONE IS THEY

ASKED THE TAX CUTS DIDN'T WORK LAST TIME UNDER BUSH, THAT'S A

FACT, WHY IS THIS DIFFERENT?

AND HE IS LIKE, KEVIN BRADY, COME

ON. AND HE'S LIKE I'M NOT ANSWERING THIS.

HE COMES UP AND

LOOKS LIKE MINI ME, EXCEPT MORE BALD.

>>PAUL RYAN HAS HAIR.

>>ALSO THAT AWFUL USED-CAR SALESMAN

SMILE, IF YOU ARE DIRECTING A MOVIE AND YOU WANT TO HAVE AN

UNCTUOUS POLITICIAN YOU DO THAT, BUT THEN YOU OUR LIKE

THAT'S A LITTLE TOO MUCH, BRING IT DOWN AND WE WILL GO AGAIN.

>>AND PAUL RYAN PREVIOUSLY GOT CRITICISM, TAKING THIS PICTURE

OF ALL THE REPUBLICAN INTERNS AND THEY WERE ALL WHITE --

I'M BEING UNFAIR NOW.

>>I ASSUME HE'S A CONGRESSMAN.

>>I WOULDN'T MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION BUT I COULD BE WRONG.

>>I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE QUESTION THAT

WAS ASKED, ALTHOUGH IT WASN'T ANSWERED IT WAS ALSO INHERENTLY

FLAWED AND INCORRECT, THEY SAID THE BUSH TAX CUTS DIDN'T WORK,

BUT THEY DID WORK, YOU ARE JUST ASSUMING WHAT THEIR GOAL SHOULD

HAVE BEEN.

IF YOU WERE THINKING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO MAKE JOBS AND

ALL THAT, IT DIDN'T WORK IN THAT, BUT IT DID TRANSFER MONEY

TO THE MOST WEALTHY PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY, SO WHY WHEN

THEY DO IT AGAIN?

>>OF

COURSE THEY CAN'T ADMIT THAT, SO HE GOES WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION?

>>THEY AREN'T GOING TO PIN HIM DOWN NECESSARILY BUT HE

WILL HAVE AN INTERESTING DODGE HERE.

>>THE LAST EXPERIMENT DIDN'T LEAD TO GROWTH OR HIGHER WAGES

OR JOBS, AND FACT THE OPPOSITE, SO WHY --

>>THIS IS A COMPLETE REDESIGN OF THE CODE, SO WE CAN SIMPLIFY IT

SO MUCH THAT 9/10 AMERICANS CAN FILE USING A POSTCARD CELL

SYSTEM, LOWERING THE RATES, PROTECTING MORE OF THE FIRST

DOLLARS YOU EARN, MAKING SURE YOU HAVE STRONG MIDDLE-CLASS

RELIEF, BUT IT'S MORE THAN THAT.

WE ARE JUST PUTTING HIGHER

OCTANE FUEL IN AN OLD CLUNKER, WE PROPOSE TO DRIVE A NEWER TAX

CAR THAT CAN COMPETE AND WIN AGAINST ANY COUNTRY IN THE

WORLD, SO THAT REDESIGN FOR SIMPLICITY, FAIRNESS, AND

COMPETITIVENESS, I PREDICT UNDER THIS TAX REFORM PLAN AMERICA

WILL FAULT FROM 31ST IN THE WORLD TO THE TOP THREE AS THE

BEST PLACES ON THE PLANET FOR THAT NEXT NEW JOB, THAT

NEXT NEW MANUFACTURING PLANT, THAT NEXT NEW RESEARCH

HEADQUARTERS, THAT IS WHAT IS DIFFERENT.

>>THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR CORPORATIONS.

>>SHE ASKED A SPECIFIC QUESTION, LAST TAX CUTS UNDER BUSH DID NOT

CREATE JOBS, YOU GUYS, REPUBLICANS, SAID IT WOULD, AND

IF YOU REMEMBER AT THE END OF BUSH'S TENURE WE LOST 8 MILLION

JOBS BECAUSE OF THE CRASH, SO NOT ONLY DID IT NOT LEAD TO

ECONOMIC GROWTH, IT LED TO A CRASH, NOT JOBS.

SO WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT THIS WILL LEAD TO JOBS

SINCE IT DIDN'T WORK LAST TIME?

>>I HAVE A POSTCARD.

>>I HAVE A POSTCARD, A NEWER TAX CAR, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT

MEANS BUT IT SOUNDS GOOD.

>>WHEN YOU'RE MAKING A CLUNKY ANALOGY, DON'T PUT CLUNKER IN

IT, IT IS TOO ON THE NOSE.

>>I PREDICT WE WILL GO FROM NUMBER 31 AND A CATEGORY I JUST

MADE UP TO NUMBER ONE IN THAT CATEGORY.

WHAT ABOUT JOBS?

FOR THAT WE GO TO THE NEXT CLIP.

>>THAT MIGHT SEEM LIKE A BIZARRE -- WHY DO THEY KEEP

COMING BACK TO THE STUPID ONE PAGE THING?

IT'S IMPORTANT TO

NOTE THAT IT'S NOT TRUE, YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO FILL OUT A

POSTCARD, BUT THEY REALLY WANT YOU TO THINK YOU WILL BE ABLE

TO.

I DON'T THINK IT'S A STUPID STRATEGY, I THINK IT'S AN HONEST

STRATEGY WHERE THEY ARE BETTING THAT YOU WILL LET TRILLIONS BE

TRANSFERRED TO CORPORATIONS AND THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE IN THE

COUNTRY BECAUSE YOU REALLY JUST WOULD PREFER NOT TO HAVE TO FILL

OUT AS MUCH PAPERWORK.

LAZINESS WILL TRUMP FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST.

>>THAT WAS THE SOUL OF THE HERMAN CAIN CAMPAIGN.

>>EVENTUALLY THEY WILL BOIL DOWN EVERYTHING TO ONE TWEET.

>>WE ARE GOING TO NEED THE 280 CHARACTERS.

>>THEY PAINT IT AS SIMPLICITY, DULL OR A, FILLING OUT TAXES IS

A PAIN IN THE ASS, BUT THE REAL REASON IS IF YOU ONLY HAVE ONE

PIECE OF PAPER YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT MANY TAXES, AND THEY DON'T

WANT TAXES ON THE RICH, AND IF YOU ONLY HAVE ONE PIECE OF PAPER

FOR ALL YOUR LAWS YOU CAN'T HAVE A LOT OF REGULATIONS, YOU CAN'T

SAY -- THE CRIMES ARE MURDER, RAPE, ROBBERY, AND I RAN OUT OF

ROOM, THERE IS NO ROOM FOR FINANCIAL CRIMES.

IT'S PART OF

THEIR SLASH AND BURN STRATEGY, IT'S CLEVER BUT IT'S NOT

POLLING WELL BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE SEEN TAX

CUTS FOR THE RICH.

For more infomation >> Can't Defend Your Trickle-Down Economics? Change The Subject! - Duration: 10:43.

-------------------------------------------

Neighbor Says Toddler Is Living In Abandoned House. When Cop Pulls Back Sheet Can't Believe Eyes - Duration: 2:33.

Subscribe to our channel for more : http://bit.ly/2lB6QeW Visit our website : http://newzmagazine.com/

Neighbor Says Toddler Is Living In Abandoned House.

When Cop Pulls Back Sheet Can't Believe Eyes

We are at that point in the year when the bathing suits get locked up and the boots

and sweaters come out.

Pool days turn into bonfire nights, and barbecue afternoons are now hot chocolate evenings.

The leaves are changing colors and making themselves at home on our lawns instead of

in the trees.

Although I do not like the cold, I do like everything that this season brings: Thanksgiving,

holiday movies and music, and Christmas!

While I am grateful to get to enjoy these things in the comfort of my own home, unfortunately,

there are people out there who are not able to say the same.

Thankfully, there are others who do all that they can to change that!

The neighbor of a vacant home in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, grew suspicious that there might

be people living inside so she contacted the police.

When they arrived, they were saddened by what they found.

A family was spending the cold nights in this abandoned house with absolutely no plumbing,

no electricity, and no heating, meaning it was absolutely freezing inside!

The mother had lost her job and the family had nowhere to go and nothing to eat.

When Officer Daniel Resnik entered one of the cold bedrooms of the home, he pulled back

the bed sheets and discovered a 2-year-old boy sleeping with layers of jackets on.

Another officer on the scene, Officer Vincenzo Paolo, took the boy outside to his squad car

so he could warm up.

Their compassion didn't stop there.

Inside, they noticed that the only food around was a bag of chips.

The little boy's arm was so padded with jackets that he couldn't even reach into

the chip bag.

Officer Paolo, who is the father of five adopted foster children, helped feed the boy some

chips.

Another officer even went so far as to buy him chicken nuggets and fries from a local

fast food establishment.

"I was trying to do anything I could to occupy him and kind of take his mind off of

what was going on," said Officer Paolo.

We are so happy to see how kindly these officers acted towards this family going through a

tough time.

It is sad people ever get into these types of situations, but it is so heartwarming to

see how good people go out of their way to get them out!

Thank you, Officers Resnik and Paolo, for showing kindness to this struggling family.

Your good deed will not go forgotten.

For more infomation >> Neighbor Says Toddler Is Living In Abandoned House. When Cop Pulls Back Sheet Can't Believe Eyes - Duration: 2:33.

-------------------------------------------

Why Can't We Find the Theory of Everything? Einstein, and Rogue Genius | Eric Weinstein - Duration: 10:25.

In some ways we've been making amazing progress for 40 years—in my opinion—in the mathematics

of field theory, which is the underlying geometric structure that undergirds both particle theory

and general relativity.

So this has been an incredibly exciting time because this dictionary has opened up which

ports all of the best insights from physics into differential geometry and from differential

geometry back into physics.

So you'd be hard-pressed to say that nothing is happening.

The problem is that we really wanted to quantize the geometry of general relativity but, in

fact, what we ended up doing was geometrizing the quantum.

And so it's been a bit of a disappointment for theoretical physicists who hoped that

they would be living through a golden age of theoretical physics rather than the mathematics

of theoretical physics.

So the field of particle theory has in some ways seemed to be advancing in terms of its

mathematical underpinnings.

But the elaborations on the standard model which is our specific understanding of the

world in which we live has been all but stalled from the theory side since around 1973-1974.

So it's a bit of a paradoxical situation and I think that, in part, we've never really

been here before.

There was a period between about 1928 until the late 40s when theoretical physics had

found quantum electrodynamics, the theory of electrons and photons, where most of the

calculations we wanted to do gave infinite answers.

The underlying theory seems sound.

We just didn't know how to get real contact with experiment.

And it took a long time for us to realize that we had a technical problem rather than

a need for an absolutely fundamental revolution of the kind that brought us general relativity

and quantum theory.

So I think that we're a bit stuck and we don't really know how long this very strange

period is going to go on for, and this period has been dominated by the sort of quixotic

hopes that one of a number of theories—whether it be super-symmetry theory, grand unified

theory, technicolor or even noncommunicative geometry—might be our way out.

But the problem is that all of these highly speculative theories have remained in limbo

and many of them have gotten rolled into this very strange complex of ideas that we call

either string theory or M theory or some variant thereof.

And it is a question as to whether this is more of a physics-inspired theory or whether

it's really an economic and sociological phenomenon, which is that you have a generation

that physicists in the baby boom who seem to be absolutely astounding geometers but

appear to be wanting in terms of their ability to make contact with the natural world by

the standards of previous generations.

And naturally that's going to elicit some very strong feelings, because the idea that

we would have had perhaps two generations let's say in 40 years of physicists who

can't make contact with experimental reality with their theories is completely unprecedented

in the modern era.

This is very interesting and rather disturbing.

So I was quite inspired by a talk or two that I've seen of the distinguished physicist

Nima Arkani-Hamed where in essence he points out that the three main equations that give

us all of theoretical physics—the Dirac equation for matter and then the force equations,

the Yang-Mills equation, and the Einstein field equations—are all in some sense provably

the best possible equations in their category of equations.

And so what happened was that we had a question: is there any way to go about finding even

better equations?

And we can essentially prove that these equations cannot be beaten in any simple way.

So the possible elaborations I would say are now obvious, and we've tried all of them

and none of them have seemed to yield to anything that clearly advances our picture beyond where

we are now.

So the question is, do we need a radical rethinking?

Is there something wrong with the fundamentals?

Is Einstein, in fact, wrong to slip in space-time on the ground floor of the theoretical physics

which is shared by both quantum field theory and general relativity?

Or are we simply in that situation where you think you've searched your apartment everywhere

for your missing spectacles or keys but, in fact, it was hiding in plain sight the whole

time—You just didn't think to look in the right place?

And I would say the jury is really out and the problem is that this is in some sense

– and I say this not as an insider in physics but really as an outsider since I wasn't

trained in that subject per se—But this is the world's most accomplished intellectual

community, whether you find them easy to deal with or sometimes rather unpleasant as I occasionally

do.

There is no question in my mind that no other group has ever achieved anything like the

theoretical physics community.

But the question is, why are they stumped?

And if they do need help where can it come from?

It doesn't seem that any of the chemists or the biologists would have enough to contribute

even though physics has contributed to both of those fields.

And so the real hope is that it's either going to come from theoretical physicists

themselves, from mathematicians who struggle to make any kind of contact because the pedagogy

in physics is quite forbidding (and I would say it's not quite as good as the pedagogy

in mathematics generally speaking), or it is going to come from some completely strange

source, maybe somebody who is a self-teacher, off the grid, that we've never heard of.

But we've heard from all of the leading lights and I would have to say that almost

no one from the traditional community really has any kind of a great idea as to how to

make the next progress.

Well I think that if you think about Einstein's vision abstractly, properly, in all probability

I think he'll be proved right in the end in the abstract.

But the key question is, did he get some of the particulars wrong?

He has a beautiful quote where he says that his equation can be viewed as a mansion with

two wings, one of which is made from fine marble and the other is made from cheap wood

(being the two signs of the equality).

Now most people have looked at the cheap wood and said well, our theory of matter and the

stress energy tensor as it's known technically is probably what needs to be upgraded so that

the equation is pure marble on both sides.

There's a rather more disturbing possibility which is that the marble is, in fact, a premature

codification of the geometry and that, in fact, it is not impossible that we have been

so beguiled by the beauty and elegance of the marble side of Einstein's equation that

we haven't put nearly the time or the energy into figuring out whether that's where the

problem is.

But the problem for us if we do go down that route is that Einstein's theory is so locked

in at this point through path dependence.

We've built everything upon his insights that it's not really clear how you could

make a modification to the foundations of physics without having the whole thing collapse

around you.

And so even if you have an idea that you're going to do something very heterodox, which

is to question the bedrock or the marble of the geometry, the question is can you even

get to it given the incredible skyscraper that has been built on his solid geometric

foundations?

So this is in some sense the route that I've gone down, which is to try to think about

novel approaches.

If you are going to break with the community it's very difficult to keep up with that

level of neural horsepower if you have any other commitments on your time.

So in some sense if you choose the path of the dissident or the heterodox or the crank,

you will find that your only hope and chance is to have a really novel idea about how this

game goes so that you have some time and some breathing room for everyone else.

And, of course, nobody's very optimistic about that prospect because it's very difficult

to do work on one's own as Einstein did in the patent office.

In fact we haven't seen a second version of his story since his famous emergence from

the patent office.

However, the fact is that the traditional community is also stalled out.

So you have two horses, neither of which seems to be capable of finishing the race, and the

question at this moment is should we be looking more to the heterodox—running the risk of

craziness and cranks—or should we be looking more to the traditional community which seems

to have gotten itself in a cul-de-sac that we call string theory, M-theory and super

symmetry?

The jury is out but I think it's become a much more interesting question because traditionally

we would have bet on the experts.

But the experts have taken more time researching this theory than any group I think has ever

taken to research a theory.

And the fact that they have been unable to find anything, in fact, means that perhaps

the odds have changed in that race.

For more infomation >> Why Can't We Find the Theory of Everything? Einstein, and Rogue Genius | Eric Weinstein - Duration: 10:25.

-------------------------------------------

5 Mystery Riddles Only the Smartest 5% Can Solve - Duration: 3:05.

For more infomation >> 5 Mystery Riddles Only the Smartest 5% Can Solve - Duration: 3:05.

-------------------------------------------

Court Rules Cowboys' Elliott Can Play This Sunday - Duration: 1:41.

For more infomation >> Court Rules Cowboys' Elliott Can Play This Sunday - Duration: 1:41.

-------------------------------------------

alex745alejandro/Ali Can Hayatını Kaybetti (Ali Can Abimiz Öldü) - Duration: 1:44.

For more infomation >> alex745alejandro/Ali Can Hayatını Kaybetti (Ali Can Abimiz Öldü) - Duration: 1:44.

-------------------------------------------

Alex745alejandro/(Ali Can Abinin Ölümü İle Bilgiler) - Duration: 2:43.

For more infomation >> Alex745alejandro/(Ali Can Abinin Ölümü İle Bilgiler) - Duration: 2:43.

-------------------------------------------

Can I get uh... (TheGreatOrGood Edition) - Duration: 0:14.

*guy walks into restaurant*

Employee: Hey there! Can I take your order?

Guy: Yeah, can I get a freakin' uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

*another guy joins in*

*yet another guy joins in*

*EAR RAPE*