Copenhagen Climate

" Ha ha ha ha -- all well and you know they'll do is give you heard me make reference stood in I think you've been idea participant in -- from time to time. On Wednesday's of course here we do the -- green hills bakery. And the warm stones and the other our Chris Hansen's twice coming back tomorrow and I knew this guy that's exactly right we got his arrival this morning great oh great reception on his but -- it's it seems. Anybody see. -- it everybody who's anybody. Has to hop on a private jet off filed the way to Copenhagen there in the process. Of making their way to Copenhagen for the big. Climate summit -- Nelson and I know you're a skeptic on this we made reference to it last week we talked about it a great deal. In to them who what with three got to the emails the leaked emails and the corruption if you will that's -- it certainly that you used. I think repeatedly the corruption of some of the science. Around the global warming premise. Which is really the foundation for this Copenhagen about climate summit so tell -- lot of Reading on this what's the latest from by the we -- some point of view well. That there's a lot."

" Going on with regard is in the this summit did begin and we had the EPA administrator from the United States. You're talking about weighing in about how -- united -- gonna do something at a time where they also are saying they declared carbon dioxide. To be a -- passion which is going to give them the carte Blanche to regulate. As much as they want -- You know we've talked about cap and trade which is a formula for trading off your. -- Carbon pollution permits yet and -- judge you guys like Al Gore can continue to pollute the -- they simply trade awfully -- wish I had the trees somewhere give this should put -- mart blue shirt and put them at this stage any deal is all talk Paula I'm buying -- I pulled dispensation. I would -- well with the EPA. There's no trade which is -- our show so this could really be a dangerous thing all this going on together my own view issue -- skeptic I guess. I'm trying to keep an open mind on it but we're not here. So -- would what's been an open mind on that it -- be -- most residents on the possibility of being made fossil fuel based activity creating numerous serious climate change and -- with an implication being that there are -- bunch of man made propositions and regulations that will change that would address and I don't know or call and I haven't in my computer you can anybody can look it up New York Times and Newsweek magazine. Banner headlines big stories in 1975. Consensus from his global."

" Calling the new ice -- yeah -- new ice -- I remember it very well the unit he is did he is the benefit of having a few -- under -- belt Levy and you and I have that for sure. This it is an institutional memory you have reference. Points. So for example -- a few moments ago we talk about the clover club guys and -- licensing board back in the seventies arrays were doing some things. With regard to what the last -- You very quickly retrieve from your memory from new all the reading you've done. The the hysteria that's really what was the hysteria about the coming ice age -- in the seventies Paul Ehrlich. Arguing for zero population growth because the Plano was gonna be unsustainable. And that America's population should be actually you know all these always academics come up with these precise figures that have nothing to do with the real."

" your life for my life or anyone else is not all but that there are some academics now we're talking on global warming who have back then we're signing -- global cooling. As young post docs or grab you by only thirty odd years ago. That the but the point is that I think that there's question about the signs winner here. That the there are -- the organization and East Anglia has been charged with it with taking care of the data and the people in New York Ohio up. Are deliberately trying to prevent. Any. Articles written due to the contrary from even appearing in peer reviewed magazines I have to ask the crucial part from horrible corruption that is. Porsche signed to the size of their protocol or should I -- but I -- that's the question. If the science is so settled then why do they have to resort to these tactics to silence the opposition yet in George will's great phrase why they embroidering packs. If in fact the science is so obviously I've been hearing people flew over the last few days saying well yes there's those those emails or embarrassing but the fundamental science. Is the same and none of these emails contradict. The real question to ask is if they're so comfortable with the science. Then why are they having to engage in these kinds of tactics and makes one wonder whether the science is -- shuttle. As they would like mr."

" Believe in his I think the first legitimate question about how unsettled the science really is. The models have projected in increasing elevation in global temperatures and get for the past nine or ten years were actually now in the did the beginning of the second deck it so it's at least ten years. The climate and the the temperature has not increased notwithstanding the fact that -- pumped up from. Fossil fuel driven man made activity. Have continued to escalate so the model works better this seems to suggest an almost direct correlation. The most -- to pump up into the atmosphere the higher the Earth's temperatures going to go except the model has failed. More ten years and yet -- and we talked about this a little bit last week. The projections of these climate change should -- you know. Priests the high priest of climate change suggest with precision. We -- gonna be in 2030. 2042050. But contemporaneous. Stuff they -- they say."

" And whole hour bottle. Somehow or other and one adult and -- one of these email says says Mitch is a travesty that we can't explain -- cannot explain this decline in. In temperature. -- one also has to keep in mind here the politics of this if you can claim global warming. And if you say we must do something to save the planet. Then you get an opportunity for people in washing into an an and other countries as well to impose all these regulations. To were to in effect -- strictly come up with new rules. To in effect increase their power in Washington and that is the mindset of the power of the political class. So you've got to be careful about people who say oh yes this global warming and what's the result of that -- left."

" Have more or have demo -- you'd have little doubt that the lodge majority of these researches. And advocates of there. Have had a long held hostility to capitalism and in particular to the United States of America they long held hostility. Why -- the United States of America would go and put our own. Quality of life file way alive our economic future hostage deception hostility. Is beyond me but you mentioned the word politics and let's talk about that a little bit. I love the the article though that we talked about last week by Richard Lester the -- Wall Street Journal. Because it forces if you read it did then think about it for a moment or two which is unusual I realized that many of us might reflect upon something that we read. It takes -- quickly away from. The political game and the political smokescreen set around the Barack Obama -- in my opinion a perfect example of the political smokescreen. He is a master of conceptual. Vision that -- he speaks in themes of concepts. Very very studiously avoiding specifics. Studiously avoiding details you go back in his history. A public service. Even as an Illinois State Senate how you vote present 188. Times. In a less than impressive. Eight years stint in the Illinois State Senate and he would ducking and dodging. What might be characterized -- tough votes in the Illinois assembly. Andy and and some are other that's part of the preparation. For all -- for the president's the United States together voice and so his Steve seems to be avoid at all costs. Being specific but a guy like Richard Lester from professor and I don't see it right that's -- does a fabulous job. And taking us from conceptual. Wonderfully dramatic visions of we'll stop the rise of the oceans -- he'll -- planet. We will do all these wonderful things. To details. 85%. Of the energy that we now consumer the United States of America comes from fossil fuels 85%. And when we talk about the energy system I think a lot of people's eyes kind of black oval but it is everything we do not -- everything. How would daily commute the -- and allow all meals. Leave while the warming in the heating the indoor cooling of all homes. Putting on the lights so that we can conduct what is Ron -- idea and is the computer the radio and the television. Every thing we do unless of course we're prepared to go back to the stone age well I'll retreat to our caves we'll we'll kill we'll eat what we kill one that given day Indians -- and ask. Papa hop hop hop dancing with -- indeed yes it's unbelievable. It really is it's unbelievable so you get into specifics and the implication of that. A solo. -- wind and fought olive tree Erica yup -- remind nuclear. Is it profiled. Multiplication necessary on all fronts and yet the most -- had a advocates. For these serious changes are resistant to the notion. Of nuclear and -- and and very very comfortable with telling us all that hallway of life and our quality of life has to be diminished due to give you an idea of how how far."

" This administration is willing to go the Obama administration. As promised now the target is that US emissions will be 83%. Below current levels by 2050. And George will made it very interesting point he -- if that's the case then our missions at 2050. Will be about the same as they were in 1910. In 1910. We had about ninety million Americans. In 2050. -- estimates -- about 450. Million Americans. I just imagine trying to live in this -- technologically advanced society. In 2050 the way things were in 1910. It is an impossible construction that would impose so much constraint so much restriction so much regulation."

" It's merely a social credit look at and the word revolutionary doesn't do justice to what it is indeed radical I try to stay away from certain words that I think all -- used to -- for reviews but words like radical and corrupt. This a time enough place to use them. And the would you do use the word corrupt to a three got to the science in the manipulation of the data. The games that were being read that data revealed by those by those emails that is corruption no question about it. And this what is being proposed is a radical absolutely radical would you take into account. Block population growth that's going to -- between now and 2050. If it's even worse it's not just in 1910 level. A -- missions per person it's in 1975. Take fewest total take yourself back -- That period of time and ask yourself is in the United States of America prepared to commit to this in the name of."

" Why am I -- settled science over the river and through the food. -- To grandmother's house -- knows the way they carry the -- optimal widened drifting -- for the big bad wolf couldn't be happier -- trying to was turned try to stay -- 6172666868. Is the number I -- Nelson and John -- taking your calls let's go right to Ted -- good morning to you sir."

" Good good morning gentlemen I always enjoy obviously presents not that Todd isn't an inspiring person as well but the obvious got an. Good good handle on the on the technical stuff. And he's right no George -- is wrong if you -- proper analysis you actually take things back. Two about the three Steve page based at the United States and because just to take -- You have to remember -- state that 450 million. Versus ninety minutes is another factor of five per capita that you have to. Extracts from that this. Equation because."

" Yeah however you slice it it brings us back to the bone marrow again yeah."

" And and and the worst thing is that they get on the black helicopter -- it'll start there were circling on -- front but. That do these third -- of both -- actually the lord Christopher Montgomery of England. As Scotland. As a fantastic trip presentation they'd put together. And he has gotten thanks to. Willie soon from the Harvard Smithsonian. A copy of the draft treaty which that you UN people hid. On one of their web sites explicitly so they could say got the -- always been a full do when they sign it. That treaty mentioned the word government. In the global context. As part of this state so it's worse than just bureaucrats in Washington this will be bureaucrats. Possibly yeah it's more likely probably Geneva. Will be telling us what to do it."

" Ted Ted you know -- you -- a couple of you can raise a couple of good points and you know whether it's pristine age 1875190. Tend. It isn't sure -- and it's tell me it's illuminating. How Obama is very studious avoidance of specifics. If in fact this is such a compelling case. And a national indeed a global cause. I think back to national and global causes Abby Nelson we think of declarations of war is as such you know World War II. And other incredibly. Com important. Moments it now in our nation's history. And -- president was ready willing and able to go and say what this -- This meant. For example fighting for draft this meant that young men we're going to die. This meant to rationing he wrap all this meant that would when we're going to be expected to leave the house sold. In go to work in industry so we could have bombers and tanks and ships and guns and all the things with which you win -- us. And this is just always doing is getting wonderful flowery language. You know we have all the -- was gone kind of nonsense it's like Peter Pollack married into and out of public policy will it -- Were to be implemented and all even remotely the way the Obama administration suggesting it. It would be a war on our independence on our lifestyle. A compromise. Of of how we live in Dallas -- our economy just absolutely Delaware I had an -- you and I we started off this conversation is important that we remind each other in the audience. We started out this conversation indicating that we opened on that question. As to whether fossil fuel based man made activity. Is not it perhaps is having a negative effect on the world's climate and that will be open to solution. But -- the solutions have to be reasonable. Solutions you don't you're not expected to commit suicide economic -- other suicide Obama certainly is not to know about commit political suicide which is why he avoids. The specifics so you and I need to in gyms are getting into specific to what he'd say. Why the heck are we waiting why we timid. About nuclear power -- Why we timid about natural gas A cleaner fuels and coal. Why we timid about a whole host of -- it is we want want want but did we get hit mid as a nation about pursuing which is clearly obvious and readily available."

" Technology I find that as a news in this whole explanation for this you know Obama does not support. Drilling offshore. It if you certainly is tepid at best. To developing our resource is to -- to put out more energy that doesn't pollute such as new closures -- nuclear power. And the reason is you see if you saw that from the energy -- Then you don't get to regulate there's something about this aggregation of power that is part. Of the socialist mentality and we ought to talk a little bit about the hypocrisy. I I've seen different reports between 30045000. Tons. Of karma not actually going to be emitted into the atmosphere by the people act."

" In Copenhagen. And that private jets and limos everywhere everybody -- the current capital residents own 707. He's got five airplane. Any allies around a 707 with a handful of people. All these Hollywood -- who -- first in line to tell us how we should conserve and they're the ones in the private gave them what they asked the people GM and Ford pressure. Did you fly commercial cellular abroad other asking Hollywood --"

" Stories to life put a little thing we like just call. Talk to preserve Boston talk stations AMCC BWR. Stereo. Somewhere in America. And -- has just --"

" In the kind of way in which you -- that they are trying to keep certain research how do you know of the discussion here's my. Maybe it is -- 90% like some of the skeptics say it's only 8% maybe it's 50%. Don't tell me it's a 50% chance this when you put to. It's. -- exclusive about three hour. It stays there for 3000 years and it does start raising temperatures this going to be hot."

" New York Times guy and author of several books including the world is flat and all of them Alexis I think and a couple of other books. As tenants -- I I just earlier. I just love it -- that is best book I just love when people give this -- vacation. It's going to be in the atmosphere for 3000 years you're people who can't tell us where science is going to be in thirty years I don't remember Tom -- predicting. The the computer revolution. You know ask yourself the question is uranium ore resource. Wasn't a resource so I didn't twenty years ago now. Due to project that something that goes on now will somehow have no scientific. Antidote for 3000 years is to indulge in arrogance at the highest level. Almost always done by people who barely got through high school physics course. Let alone our scientists. That we -- it's just an outrageous. I use of hyperbole. For Friedman to make that kind of grand state I."

" I tried to I disagree with your take on a -- you have that ready get when I played again what do we put I put on hearing it Friedman. Is is actually what I thought when I tried to be a somewhat refreshing. I'll open mindedness on and it seems to -- to be he he almost seems to be as open minded about it as you and I have indicated. That would open minded debt is him. At least possibly the possibility of not the probability that all this being made fossil fuel driven activity. Since the industrial wage and accelerating obviously each and every day with India China. And -- about our contemporary developments. That the it may be some risk we should be aware of that alert to it also aware of an alert to emerging technologies which might allow us. To address it. I'm prepared to be open minded on -- to think through all of those things but I am not prepared to. Mortgage. All bankrupted that's how life economic financial that's not what he says he said that okay yeah the emails bother or maybe it's not 90% sure maybe it's only 50% sure. But it's such a big risk that we could do something because otherwise we're gonna end up. With this catastrophe okay brief closing what you're doing something edgy and you and I were open to the doing something we've indicated a couple of nuclear power. Natural gas a whole series of other things perhaps Saudi I don't know we -- around this but perhaps maybe this should be either. Costs imposed on fossil fuel to subsidize the development of those. Innovative technologies that you yourself referenced or direct subsidies to them whether that's wind solo. Photovoltaic. -- I have no idea because I'm not a scientist so while I guess when I say have opened by that idea that -- I actually think that's what we're from Jon Friedman let's go to the sound and then well let's go to -- in the calls."

" Some of those emails disappointing frankly into the kind of way in which is seen that they are trying to keep certain research how do you know of the discussion here's my tectonic. Maybe it isn't the 90% like some of the skeptics say it's only 80% maybe it's 50%. But you know what that means there's a 50% chance this when you put that could CO2 in the atmosphere he stays there for about 3000 years. So we can put that there. And it stays there for 3000 years and it does start -- temperatures. It's going to be hot -- camp for a long long time. Bottom line is that the risk is still there wouldn't say there's just a 10% I would not totally the opposite -- keep smoking you're gonna die okay."

" All right. Could you write very big deal don't give -- 3000 years they whenever I hear somebody say something like that especially in non scientist -- now I know. These exaggerating to make a political point I can prove that is such a gross misuse. Of projection. -- renders. Questionable everything else he's saying and how you don't let his use of such a specific. Time I am but a timeline he. Alter what that the that the youth of the what went to me just a plain meaning in his words he's an open minded on this is not as convinced. He remains unconvinced as being you know the stature of all I think he does."

" Richard don't know what he's saying is. We gotta do it anyway and it and he -- he put forward his doomsday scenario. City even if it's a 10% chance. He doesn't have the science down and whenever somebody starts using words like 3000 years that's going to be ever 3000 years. You get -- you have to be skeptical everything he's saying because he is a political point. The -- the arguing here. Is that don't tell me what's going to be in the atmosphere for 3000 years because you don't know where such is gonna go well what's gonna happen. And not -- making very skeptical a guy like Friedman and on this -- I'll look you."

" Skepticism let's get right to call 6172666868. Let's go to Patrick. Patrick you're on the -- audience on good morning."

" Good morning to Molinari do right there I -- just a couple point shot with that -- We're just his presentation was just totally epic it was all all. Strange. This same logic. I could say well you know it doesn't matter that the -- New York Times -- quote dark. 80% readership about it it might have to preserve readership that you'd turn it Jeter reached 10% so. Reliable short detour down now because they're getting out pretty straight environmental. -- be outraged I had the screen -- or the -- think they even I would have no basis for evaluating dropping a readership. -- if we capsule we're I don't their easiest way at all or. It refusing to recognize. Alternate fuel technology nuclear. -- I think it just. I guess I group obvious why is -- up they're saying."

" That's -- I don't know Patrick got to me that does a couple of good points out to me is the most frustrating part of this whole thing. While that we we we have the alarm being sounded repeatedly that's a dramatic changes have to be undertook undertaken in now way of life our quality of life I reckon in our economy. The resistance to be re it's not it's well beyond reluctance it's actually an out right adamant refusal. To consider. Readily available. Technologies. That would begin to dramatically reduce heart -- John Kerry on the cape wind project. Disgraceful. -- Between his rhetoric and his actions the late Senator Kennedy. Got a -- sell but -- disgraceful gap between his rhetoric in his actions on cape wind. -- nuclear power off all these folks talking about green house gases climate change America must lead. And we -- whereas we're with him it is if it's some kind of witchcraft. With regard to nuclear technology well if so it's a witchcraft that's been embraced all across the world by kind of our country's that a so technologically inferior to us that it is a joke we the technological superpower. I was right --"

" News if there's something that is at least some form of sorcery there's another side to also and that is will technologies emerge. That would take carbon monoxide out of the atmosphere. Even if they cross counselor wouldn't show and that's what Friedman fails to even comprehend that's why -- just 3000 years is it. Somehow will never come up with any idea exactly -- alliance is static interest yes I -- right exactly that's the -- Now I even mentioned question is it carbon dioxide is heavier than air. Right CO2 -- filed or to or into I'll take your word for William because CO2 has a carbon connected to the oxygen on Randy airs live just on -- you know to a nitrogen knock -- here is made up 80% nitrogen down into and 20% oxygen okay there right next to each other on the periodic table okay so my question is if CO2 is heavier than air. How come it goes up when knocked down. We keep talking about CO2 going up into the atmosphere and staying there. It's heavier than what happened article isn't is it is it what is he wouldn't it be an inherent heat differential. Now it's just what was going to go in the periodic table -- show."

" Talk tough but he's an undiscovered Marlowe not hot hot. -- was excellent seven lower keys -- 666860. We're gonna Mike hey Mike welcome your audio and Robby decided distant Tom -- the civilian growing your."

" About the about the weight you know it's not that much heavier so convection to -- the popping up just like water vapor as lighter than air. But it is an all but devastated near the ground as well. So you have it both ways there."

" And move on paper goes up you can see it coming out of stack I'm goes out than it. But you won't water vapor well okay got carbon dioxide play you know conviction eventually would to have it come down to a fixed now."

" This together at the ground you're right it's of the typical -- 3000 years ago with a builder who appear majority who might pull up. You know I thank -- thank."

" They might might egyptians won't like that in the light on in the mind Mike."

" Question is concerned the Supreme Court ruling and Ed Markey testimony must've been included data they came from the PR -- turned delta that they would also fight and it doesn't now as."

" The Supreme Court ruling Utah you do you think it is this on the common dioxide."

" Yeah exactly do they got some of that data made it come from the -- you know if that was falsified the data perjury condition should the Supreme Court. We consider this spirit there that can."

" it's not it would not be perjury but yes in terms of the decision that might have been based on flawed data. Absolutely they could resurgent and they could review that Brenda."

" Ed Markey but this time some sort of affidavit that he could you trust this this data that this deal was true into the guts of it knowledge is all."

" Did you sign an affidavit that you trust Ed -- Have you know it's interesting -- marquee act congressman and another congressman I've known him for a number -- He was in congress won't move before right before I was elected to the state also while our careers at the Statehouse had not -- crossed. But I know he's very very much involved -- price centrally involved in this I mean mr. cannon the moving force. In the house behind that cap and trade bill which you and I've been critical of him which remains stalled. In the Senate in part because of these specific issue you and I -- about. What the heck is the impact. On any economy even a booming economy. Let alone an economy that is limping in the way how is is if all of a sudden. Carbon dioxide is going to be treated as a health has -- in the apply additional regulation it's gonna be imposed on every done business in every human activity mean right now literally we joke about it because of the hot here we associate with. We'll talk radio but every person out there is he admitting what the EPA just -- is a health has a -- Israel -- serve as as we breathe out. There it is you are re meeting pollution while 6172666868. Let's go to who sued what are we note -- break. -- break and then back to the calls it a moment on AM six AB WRKO."

" In Croatia those priceless we're worth absolute leader. -- want to know. It's -- Nelson Tom Finneran. Go right to alliance is Scott and everybody else been hanging on -- too long let's go right to start hey Scott good morning and thanks for being."

" They morning I have -- that -- I've -- for -- and actually I just expanded it during a conversation this morning. That's -- property a thumb I would stop of their global warming and pollution debate was like a smoking debate. And if you can had to do just sit there and can fire. Have the wind blow your direction to go they look pretty bad can it get it. And when all the argument about what he was going on 1020 years ago. It occurred nearly you know you can debate exact science but we -- kind of it's bad because. -- that's definitely connect a campfire you don't like it."

" Now and I would itself out."

" we can do it obviously morning's sound like people planet trigger sound bad decided to -- 100%. And then just that's different from what I hear is."

" Well let's Abigail let's get our chance to defend. It and knowing more home. What are you on multi gonna look the fact is -- you shot around the campfire. In what was the partially campfire presumably to get warmly eat marshmallows and -- we'll both."

" The question is not whether. He's the although the campfire emits some pollution that's bad the question is in the trade off -- the grand trade off. Do you do things besides just live in a cave in the woods because you want to live a little bit more comfortably at the risk. Of putting something into the environment and the real question is whether the science -- claims that global warming. And deleterious implications of it. Is mainly man made. When you put that little campfire. And that indeed there's a little bit of pollution that goes into the atmosphere it really doesn't harm the environment. My question is if -- if the globe isn't he getting warmer -- over the last ten years it is not what the cause is of that. Is it one of irregular cycles we've had ice ages and then warming periods. Is it because of sunspot activity he did because of the kind of stuff that man is doing. If it's the first two then we shouldn't be regulating ourselves into a depressed and primitive state. If that's the latter then maybe there are some things we can do about it. But there seems to -- some vigorous debate as to whether we are indeed the cause of this and if so what should be done."

" Well and that's exactly my third point in my analogy is that especially would be self fraud came out recently that when people claim that smoking multi ten point two these -- not your life. We -- quite believe that exactly because they're candidates. Approximately ten in the right direction and the same thing it."

" Quote what a global climate change should smoking be banned."

" I got my point is that they look at global warming thing. I think it's something we should address but I don't think is something we should tell our hair on fire today over and go crazy."

" curiously enough. And they just address and observing here in this exchange between you and having but it seems to me that you are coming to the point where Robbie and I. Ourselves open minded. Canada and ready to be persuaded by looking at specific such as this and this of what President Obama proposes to do. To declare that the United States will reduce -- emissions by eighty and by 83%. By the year 2058. Specific. Commitment when in fact the science of mom. -- is in is somewhat unsettled if not totally on self. It's unsettled and when the implications of an 83%. Cobb -- reduction by 2050 means that you and I Scott will be using energy the equivalent of what was used by people in the eighteen. 75 good -- computer. Goodbye to -- automobile goodbye lights goodbye heat could buy food good."

" all of I think you're exactly right and I think that when you decided -- bad you decide that I've been."

" Okay we -- gotten lost Glasscock. -- the -- call 6172666860. Of them no more want to live the way we did just think of how -- we lived in eighteens only five annually you don't really want it's sheriff especially well we're not sure. That's necessary and and and by the way the people -- only east amenable to that."

" Would be Al Gore Barack Obama the Hollywood crowd I mean come I know you -- private planes will be exempt. Now let's go to -- Chirac's welcome Iran via an audience off."

" Good morning guys Monroe and you know -- leaders want to change the quality of ally if not to Serbs. You know get a little like that. They live the life of extravagance. He burned plenty of energy and then I wanna give a step BS -- the cabin credits you know. Could not Barack Obama bought a nice big brand new Cadillac for himself state drives around him. All the travel -- that he does all of this country and all over the world. What does it cost us every time Air Force One flying along with these companies crash that did go on without. It is unbelievable."

" Well I I don't know the direct answer that but I know somebody estimated that the cost of his flying. To pick up the Nobel prize this. What is going to be about that the value of the prize itself million dollars or something like that actually caused flight vehicle opening but the other thing that I I think we ought to."

" He's doing I don't know I was giving you a hint that he. You know we're gonna -- we're gonna continue with this topic right through the great radio through an -- beyond the regular stuff. Rush Limbaugh everywhere they've removed the story wholly new. On Boston."

" Your -- here. Okay the forecast partly sunny today with a high of forty right now 31 degrees under fair skies."