Thank you for your nice comment. I’ve lent your book to a few other people here on the Blue Unit, and it has been pretty popular. A couple people in the animal department have read and enjoyed it, and I continue to pass it around. I guess it’s lucky I know Sally and Bob of Mountainside Press.

I’d love to have a conversation about Ringling, circus, writing, and so on, but I don’t want to have it where everyone can see. I’m not sure how to email you, but if you use the “email me” link at the end of the ‘About’ page on my blog, I’ll tell you a little bit about my time with Ringling.

Jonathan

Mike

Thanks for reading, and I enjoyed reading your blog.

-Brad Herzog

I don’t mean that science is reliable, i mean that the science you compare with should be reliable, as science within new frontiers are changing quicker than the stockmarke t:-)

Steiner has many times and places said that you should not thrust anybody by word, you should check it yourselves. One of Steiners goals was to teach people to think themselves, and he was afraid that the Anthroposophic organization would be a stiff orthodox organisation when he died. So I don’t think he would wish you to enter it today.

As I understand your writing, your education has made you an independent thinker, so the Waldorff school has some merit.

With that education I think you would have problems being ‘religious’ in normal fashion, as you would have problems believing in anything that you don’t understand.

What Steiner does is to show that all religions on the Earth have a common core and the reason for it. But to read it without controlling it with your everyday life or with other religious texts, and reliable science is dangerous.

He has written a lot of books, but it is as difficult to start reading a random book here as it is to start with a random book of physics. The first book I read was named something like ‘The Akasha Chronicles’ describing the development of the earth, giving the big picture. Then you have a fair chance to see if you want to read more. They could have it here http://www.rsarchive.org/ .

May you have fun on your search,
Kim

Senate Vice President
Assistant to PSU Sustainability Coordinator
Environmental Club President

Basically, we do need to upgrade a bridge. Unfortunately, not that bridge, but the one a mile downriver that the trains go across.

Dear Mr. Leiss:

I am writing to provide a correction to the response I sent you on April 15. I have since received further clarification on information we discussed.

In your previous email you asked about the 15 percent vehicle reduction projected by the Columbia River Crossing project. I am assuming that you got this figure from the memo posted on our website from CRC staff to CRC project directors, Doug Ficco and John Osborn. The memo says:

“The CRC project is proposing provision of tolls. Compared to a non-tolling scenario, tolling the I-5 bridge would reduce daily vehicle-trips crossing the Columbia River on I-5 by 15 percent.”

The 15 percent reduction is a projection for a scenario that only included tolling the I-5 bridge. This projection didn’t take into account the project’s other two integrated solutions of bridge improvements and high capacity transit. A tolling-only scenario is not one under consideration by CRC because it would not meet the goals established by project sponsors to address highway safety problems, upgrade bicycle and pedestrian access, increase freight mobility and provide travel options.

I hope this provides clarification on this projection. Thank you for your interest in the Columbia River Crossing project.

Sincerely,

Anne Pressentin
Columbia River Crossing
Communications and Public Outreach