Recent heat spike unlike anything in 11,000 years

Chart shows world temperatures going back 11,000 years

Chart shows world temperatures going back 11,000 years

FILE - In this Aug. 29, 1938 file photo, smoke rises from smokestacks at Skoda?s main foundry in Pilsen, Czechoslovakia. A new study looking at 11,000 years of climate temperatures shows the world in the middle of a dramatic U-turn, lurching from near-record cooling to a heat spike. It shows how the globe for several thousands of years was cooling until an unprecedented reversal in the 20th century, which scientists say is further evidence that global warming isn?t natural but man-made since the start of the Industrial Revolution. The research was released Thursday, March 7, 2013 in the journal Science. (AP Photo)

WASHINGTON (AP) ? A new study looking at 11,000 years of climate temperatures shows the world in the middle of a dramatic U-turn, lurching from near-record cooling to a heat spike.

Research released Thursday in the journal Science uses fossils of tiny marine organisms to reconstruct global temperatures back to the end of the last ice age. It shows how the globe for several thousands of years was cooling until an unprecedented reversal in the 20th century.

Scientists say it is further evidence that modern-day global warming isn't natural, but the result of rising carbon dioxide emissions that have rapidly grown since the Industrial Revolution began roughly 250 years ago.

The decade of 1900 to 1910 was one of the coolest in the past 11,300 years ? cooler than 95 percent of the other years, the marine fossil data suggest. Yet 100 years later, the decade of 2000 to 2010 was one of the warmest, said study lead author Shaun Marcott of Oregon State University. Global thermometer records only go back to 1880, and those show the last decade was the hottest for this more recent time period.

"In 100 years, we've gone from the cold end of the spectrum to the warm end of the spectrum," Marcott said. "We've never seen something this rapid. Even in the ice age the global temperature never changed this quickly."

Using fossils from all over the world, Marcott presents the longest continuous record of Earth's average temperature. One of his co-authors last year used the same method to look even farther back. This study fills in the crucial post-ice age time during early human civilization.

Marcott's data indicates that it took 4,000 years for the world to warm about 1.25 degrees from the end of the ice age to about 7,000 years ago. The same fossil-based data suggest a similar level of warming occurring in just one generation: from the 1920s to the 1940s. Actual thermometer records don't show the rise from the 1920s to the 1940s was quite that big and Marcott said for such recent time periods it is better to use actual thermometer readings than his proxies.

Before this study, continuous temperature record reconstruction only went back about 2,000 years. The temperature trend produces a line shaped like a "hockey stick" with a sudden spike after what had been a fairly steady line. That data came from tree rings, ice cores and lake sediments.

Marcott wanted to go farther back, to the end of the last ice age in more detail by using the same marine fossil method his colleague used. That period also coincides with a "really important time for the history of our planet," said Smithsonian Institution research anthropologist Torben Rick. That's the time when people started to first domesticate animals and start agriculture, which is connected to the end of the ice age.

Marcott's research finds the climate had been gently warming out of the ice age with a slow cooling that started about 6,000 years ago.

Then the cooling reversed with a vengeance.

The study shows the recent heat spike "has no precedent as far back as we can go with any confidence, 11,000 years arguably," said Pennsylvania State University professor Michael Mann, who wrote the original hockey stick study but wasn't part of this research. He said scientists may have to go back 125,000 years to find warmer temperatures potentially rivaling today's.

However, another outside scientist, Jeff Severinghaus of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography thinks temperatures may have been notably warmer just 12,000 years ago, at least in Greenland based on research by some of his colleagues.

Several outside scientists praised the methods Marcott used, but said it might be a bit too oriented toward the Northern Hemisphere.

Marcott said the general downward trend of temperatures that reversed 100 years ago seemed to indicate the Earth was heading either toward another ice age or little ice age from about 1550 to 1850. Or it was continuing to cool naturally until greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels changed everything.

The reason the globe warmed after the ice age and then started cooling about 6,000 years ago has to do with the tilt of the Earth and its distance from the sun, said Marcott and Severinghaus. Distance and angle in the summer matter because of heat absorption and reflection and ground cover.

"We have, through human emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, indefinitely delayed the onset of the next ice age and are now heading into an unknown future where humans control the thermostat of the planet," said Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist at Texas Tech University, responding in an email.

___

Online:

Science: http://www.sciencemag.org

___

Seth Borenstein can be followed at http://twitter.com/borenbears

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/b2f0ca3a594644ee9e50a8ec4ce2d6de/Article_2013-03-08-US-SCI-Climate-Temperature-Spike/id-844b092798614b6e98d52318cf53ac69

penn state Ernie Els Teen Choice Awards 2012 Aurora victims usher James Holmes Minka Kelly sex tape

Security threats, fractures plague US and Afghans

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, left, meets with Afghanistan's Interior Minister Ghulam Mujtaba Patang at the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) headquarters in Kabul, Sunday, March 10, 2013. It is Hagel's first official trip since being sworn-in as Obama's Defense Secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, left, meets with Afghanistan's Interior Minister Ghulam Mujtaba Patang at the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) headquarters in Kabul, Sunday, March 10, 2013. It is Hagel's first official trip since being sworn-in as Obama's Defense Secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, second left, walks with Afghan Brig. Gen. Aminullah Patyani, left, commander of the Kabul Military Training Center, upon his arrival at the facility in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, March 10, 2013. Hagel is on his first trip to Afghanistan as defense secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, center, talks with members of the U.S. Army and Marines during his visit to the Kabul Military Training Center in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, March 10, 2013. Hagel is on his first trip to Afghanistan as defense secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, left, is greeted by members of the U.S. Army and Marines during his visit to the Kabul Military Training Center in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, March 10, 2013. Hagel is on his first trip to Afghanistan as defense secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, center left, shakes hands with a female Afghan non-commissioned officer under training, during his visit to the Kabul Military Training Center in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, March 10, 2013. Hagel is on his first trip to Afghanistan as defense secretary. (AP Photo/Jason Reed, Pool)

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) ? A series of security problems and difficult fractures in relations with Afghan leaders plagued Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's first trip here as Pentagon chief, including the Afghan president's accusations that the U.S. and the Taliban are working in concert to show that violence in the country will worsen if most coalition troops leave.

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Joseph Dunford, quickly rejected the charges President Hamid Karzai made Sunday as "categorically false." But the accusations were just the latest in a series of disputes that have frayed relations between the two nations as the U.S. works to wind down the war and turn the country's security over to the Afghans.

Speaking to reporters shortly after Karzai made the comments, Dunford said the Afghan leader has never expressed such views to him but said it was understandable that tensions would arise as the coalition balances the need to complete its mission with the Afghans' move to exercise more sovereignty.

"We have fought too hard over the past 12 years, we have shed too much blood over the past 12 years, we have done too much to help the Afghan security forces grow over the last 12 years to ever think that violence or instability would be to our advantage," said Dunford.

Dunford's comments came, however, soon after U.S. officials cancelled a news conference with Hagel and Karzai because of a security threat ? just a day after a suicide bomber on a bicycle struck outside the Afghan Defense Ministry, killing nine Afghan civilians and wounding 14 others. Hagel heard the explosion from the safe location where he was meeting with Afghan officials but was never in danger.

The security problems compounded a series of flare-ups in recent weeks, including a dispute that has stalled the transfer of a U.S. prison to Afghan authority as well as Karzai's order to expel U.S. special operations forces out of Wardak province, which lies just outside the capital, because of allegations that Afghans working with the commandos were involved in abusive behavior.

Hagel and Karzai still planned to meet privately Sunday, and some of the ongoing issues were likely to come up. The U.S. and Afghan leaders are in the midst of negotiations over the long-term presence of American forces in Afghanistan beyond the end of 2014, when all combat troops are scheduled to leave.

U.S. officials would not provide details on the security concerns that led to cancelling the news conference. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the matter publicly. But Pentagon press secretary George Little said the cancellation was not due to Karzai's earlier comments about the U.S. and the Taliban.

During a nationally televised speech, Karzai said two suicide bombings that killed 19 people on Saturday ? the one outside the Afghan Defense Ministry and the other near a police checkpoint in eastern Khost province ? show the insurgent group is conducting attacks to help show that international forces will still be needed to keep the peace after their current combat mission ends in 2014.

"The explosions in Kabul and Khost yesterday showed that they are at the service of America and at the service of this phrase: 2014. They are trying to frighten us into thinking that if the foreigners are not in Afghanistan, we would be facing these sorts of incidents," he said during the speech about the state of Afghan women.

Karzai is known for making incendiary comments in his public speeches. And Dunford on Sunday said that some of the recent disputes between the U.S.-led coalition and Afghan leaders "strike at the heart of sovereignty" and could be more political in nature. He said Karzai may be doing what he needs to do to communicate with the Afghan people and their political leaders outside the government.

Dunford also rejected the suggestion that the recent friction reflects an erosion in the U.S. relationship with Afghanistan.

"We do not have a broken relationship, we do not have a lack of trust," said Dunford, adding that none of the political dust-ups have bled over into his dealings with his Afghan security force counterparts. He said efforts to train and advise the Afghan security forces have continued and that plans for them to be in the lead for security across the country later this summer are on track.

Dunford would not detail why the scheduled transfer of the Parwan Detention Center was delayed again and called it a difference in perspective. But he made clear that the U.S. believes it must retain the power to insure that detainees who are deemed to be security threats remain in custody.

Currently, there is an Afghan administrator of the prison, which is located about an hour outside the capital, but the Americans have veto power over the release of detainees. The prisoners held under American authority do not have the right to a trial because the U.S. considers them detainees held as part of an ongoing conflict.

Regarding the move to expel the special operations forces, Dunford said he spoke to Karzai about the issue on Saturday and told him the U.S. is working on a plan to transition security in the Wardak region to Afghan forces. He would not directly say whether the commandos will stay in Wardak when the deadline to leave comes on Monday. But he said Karzai knows they are working on the plan and has not yet issued a directive to the force.

___

Associated Press writers Heidi Vogt and Rahim Faiez contributed to this report.

___

Follow Lolita C. Baldor on Twitter: http://twitter.com/lbaldor

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2013-03-10-AS-US-Afghanistan/id-1e61a22ee38944578525c16177b57734

Ohio Lottery Colorado Lottery Pa Lottery Ebates lotto Illinois Lottery texas lottery

All personal, all business in fierce GOP opposition to Obama's pick of Hagel for Pentagon job

WASHINGTON - The fierce Republican opposition to President Barack Obama's nomination of Chuck Hagel to be defense secretary is personal and business.

The nasty fight long has been seen as a proxy for the never-ending scuffles between the Democratic president and congressional Republicans, with barely any reservoir of good will between the White House and lawmakers, and the GOP still smarting over the November election results.

Barring any surprises, the drawn-out battle over Hagel's nomination probably will end this coming week with his Senate confirmation. But his fellow Republicans have roughed him up.

A vote is expected on Tuesday.

In the weeks after Obama secured a second term, Republicans knocked out a presidential favorite, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, and dashed her secretary of state hopes over her widely debunked remarks about protests precipitating the assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya on Sept. 11.

Emboldened Republicans then set their sights on Hagel, whose GOP classification won him no points with the party.

The former two-term Nebraska senator was widely viewed as a political heretic. He disagreed with President George W. Bush over the Iraq war, stayed on the sidelines in the 2008 president race between Obama and the Republican nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain, and endorsed fellow Vietnam veteran and former Democratic Sen. Bob Kerrey in last year's Nebraska Senate race.

Republicans remember it well.

"There's a lot of ill will toward Sen. Hagel because when he was a Republican, he attacked President Bush mercilessly, at one point said he was the worst president since Herbert Hoover, said the surge (of U.S. troops in Iraq) was the worst blunder since the Vietnam War, which is nonsense, and was anti-his own party and people," McCain said in an interview on Fox News on the day Republicans stalled Hagel's nomination.

Hagel didn't help his cause with his past opposition to unilateral penalties against Iran, his comment about the influence of the "Jewish lobby" in Washington, his support for reducing the nation's nuclear arsenal and remarks that created widespread doubts about his backing for Israel.

His halting and uneven performance at his confirmation hearing also hurt his nomination.

McCain, one of Hagel's friends during their years in the Senate, would have been a crucial vote to help sway other Republicans to back the nominee. Instead, he is one of more than a dozen opposing Hagel.

"I think he will have been weakened, but having said that, the job that he has is too important," McCain told reporters Friday during a visit to Mexico. "I know that I and my other colleagues, if he's confirmed, and he very likely will be, will do everything we can to work with him."

The nomination fight also is about the business of re-electing Republicans in 2014. Challenging the Democratic president over his nominations and policies is clearly a winner with the conservative base, a point not lost on GOP incumbents wary of challenges from the tea party.

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who's up for re-election next year, is getting high marks from Republicans for his relentless effort to get more information about the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya, and his fierce opposition to Hagel.

"Most people down here think he's dead-on in his arguments and hope that he continues to press the issues," said Warren Tompkins, a longtime GOP strategist.

The Libya attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans has been a political flashpoint for Republicans who accused the Obama administration of an election-year cover-up of a terrorist assault.

An independent review conducted by respected former diplomats failed to mollify the GOP, who demanded testimony from Hillary Rodham Clinton, secretary of state when the attack occurred, and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Graham has been at the forefront in seeking emails, communiques and videos while threatening to delay both Hagel's nomination and that of CIA Director-nominee John Brennan, who also has become entangled in the Libya dispute.

During a stop in Easley, S.C., this past week, Graham insisted that his effort has nothing to do with politics.

"It's not because he's a Democrat and I'm a Republican," he said, referring to Obama. "It's because it really was system failure and we need learn from it. We have not gotten the information, and we're going to get it if I have to die trying."

The White House has agreed to give the Senate Intelligence Committee additional documents related to the Benghazi attack, according to a congressional aide said. The material includes emails between national security officials showing the debate within the administration over how to describe the attack.

Graham also has been intense in opposing Hagel, portraying the former GOP senator as an out-of-the-mainstream radical. Some of the toughest questions of Hagel during his confirmation hearing last month came from Graham, who seized on Hagel's "Jewish lobby" remark and asked him to "name one dumb thing we've been goaded into doing due to pressure by the Israeli, Jewish lobby."

Hagel was often tentative in his response in the face of GOP grilling.

"He's leading, he's governing," Glenn McCall, the chairman of the York (S.C.) County Republican Party and a GOP committeeman, said of Graham. "More and more I talk to Republicans ? and even those that are conservative Democrats ? I think folks are looking for leadership."

Both Tompkins and McCall cited a Winthrop University poll released last week that showed Graham with strong support from registered Republicans in the state, with 72 percent holding a favorable opinion of the senator.

It's a turnaround from several years ago when Graham's work with Democrats on climate change and immigration as well as his votes for Obama's nominees for the Supreme Court angered South Carolina Republicans, with some calling him out of touch and Charleston and Lexington counties voting to censure him over his bipartisan work.

"It might be the right thing to do ... but when you partner with Hillary Clinton or you partner with John Kerry, you're going to be looked upon with a lot of suspicion in South Carolina," Tompkins said. "You have to be careful who you dance with."

Kerry, a former Democratic senator from Massachusetts, has just replaced Clinton as secretary of state.

Graham still may face a primary challenge, but he and other GOP incumbents are determined to head off any conservative uprising as Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch successfully did in his 2012 race. They want to avoid the fate of the only GOP primary loser last year ? Indiana's longtime Sen. Dick Lugar.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican and a candidate next year, took the lead on the Senate floor to block a vote on Hagel on Feb. 14 and was one of 15 Republicans last week to call for Obama to withdraw the nomination.

Cornyn got a primary challenger last week.

___

Follow Donna Cassata on Twitter: http://twitter.com/DonnaCassataAP

Source: http://www.startribune.com/politics/192698881.html

gladys knight private practice deion sanders creutzfeldt jakob disease the lone ranger yu darvish mad cow

How a battle over soybeans made it to the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Vernon Hugh Bowman seems comfortable with the old way of doing things, right down to the rotary-dial telephone he said he was using in a conference call with reporters.

But the 75-year-old Indiana farmer figured out a way to benefit from a high-technology product, soybeans that are resistant to weed-killers, without always paying the high price that such genetically engineered seeds typically bring. In so doing, he ignited a legal fight with seed-giant Monsanto Co. that has now come before the Supreme Court, with argument taking place Tuesday.

The court case poses the question of whether Bowman's actions violated the patent rights held by Monsanto, which developed soybean and other seeds that survive when farmers spray their fields with the company's Roundup brand weed-killer. The seeds dominate American agriculture, including in Indiana where more than 90 percent of soybeans are Roundup Ready.

Monsanto has attracted a bushel of researchers, universities and other agribusiness concerns to its side because they fear a decision in favor of Bowman would leave their own technological innovations open to poaching. The company's allies even include a company that is embroiled in a separate legal battle with Monsanto over one of the patents at issue in the Bowman case.

The Obama administration also backs Monsanto, having earlier urged the court to stay out of the case because of the potential for far-reaching implications for patents involving DNA molecules, nanotechnologies and other self-replicating technologies.

Monsanto's opponents argue that the company has tried to use patent law to control the supply of seeds for soybeans, corn, cotton, canola, sugar beets and alfalfa. The result has been a dramatic rise in seed prices and reduced options for farmers, according to the Center for Food Safety. The group opposes the spread of genetically engineered crops and says their benefits have been grossly overstated.

"It has become extremely difficult for farmers to find high-quality conventional seeds," said Bill Freese, the center's science policy analyst.

Consumer groups and organic food producers have fought Monsanto over genetically engineered farm and food issues in several settings. They lost a campaign in California last year to require labels on most genetically engineered processed foods and produce. Monsanto and other food and chemical companies spent more than $40 million to defeat the ballot measure.

Monsanto says the success of its seeds are proof of their value. By and large, "farmers appreciate what we do," David Snively, Monsanto's top lawyer, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Herbicide-resistant soybean seeds first hit the market in 1996. To protect its investment in their development, Monsanto has a policy that prohibits farmers from saving or reusing the seeds once the crop is grown. Farmers must buy new seeds every year.

Like almost every other farmer in Indiana. Bowman used the patented seeds for his main crop. But for a risky, late season crop on his 300 acres in Sandborn, about 100 miles southwest of Indianapolis, Bowman said, "I wanted a cheap source of seed."

He couldn't reuse his own beans or buy seeds from other farmers who had similar agreements with Monsanto and other companies licensed to sell genetically engineered seeds. And dealers he used to buy cheap seed from no longer carry the unmodified seeds.

So Bowman found what looked like a loophole and went to a grain elevator that held soybeans it typically sells for feed, milling and other uses, but not as seed.

Bowman reasoned that most of those soybeans also would be resistant to weed killers, as they initially came from herbicide-resistant seeds, too. He was right, and he repeated the practice over eight years.

He didn't try to keep it a secret from Monsanto and in October 2007, the company sued him for violating its patent. Bowman's is one of 146 lawsuits Monsanto has filed since 1996 claiming unauthorized use of its Roundup Ready seeds, Snively said.

A federal court in Indiana sided with Monsanto and awarded the company $84,456 for Bowman's unlicensed use of Monsanto's technology. The federal appeals court in Washington that handles all appeals in patent cases, upheld the award. The appeals court said that farmers may never replant Roundup Ready seeds without running afoul of Monsanto's patents.

The Supreme Court will grapple with the limit of Monsanto's patent rights, whether they stop with the sale of the first crop of beans, or extend to each new crop soybean farmers grow that has the gene modification that allows it to withstand the application of weed-killer.

The company sees Bowman's actions as a threat both to its Roundup Ready line of seeds and to other innovations that could be easily and cheaply reproduced if they were not protected.

"This case really is about 21st century technologies," Snively said.

Bowman and his allies say Monsanto's legal claims amount to an effort to bully farmers.

The Center for Food Safety's Freese points out that Monsanto's biggest moneymaker is corn seed, which cannot be replanted. "So seed-saving would have no impact on the majority of Monsanto's seed revenue," he said.

The case is Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 11-796.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/high-stakes-fight-over-soybeans-high-court-140546296--finance.html

ariel winter Paige Butcher David Petraeus Petraeus Mia Love wall street journal us map

Happy 50th Birthday, Michael Jordan!

Source:

Superdome Iron Man 3 Trailer Super Bowl 2013 Ray Rice sodastream dan marino godaddy

Shorter mortgage or lower monthly bills?

For new homeowners, the decision between a shorter-term mortgage and a longer one with much lower monthly bills is a tough call. Use non-financial elements of your personal life to determine which is best for you.?

By Trent Hamm,?Guest blogger / February 16, 2013

A home is for sale in Mount Lebanon, Pa. According to Hamm, there are sound financial reasons for both a shorter-term mortgage with high monthly bills and a longer-term mortgage with lower ones. The decisions may come down to non-financial elements of your life.

Gene J. Puskar/AP/File

Enlarge

Jennifer writes in:

Skip to next paragraph Trent Hamm

The Simple Dollar is a blog for those of us who need both cents and sense: people fighting debt and bad spending habits while building a financially secure future and still affording a latte or two. Our busy lives are crazy enough without having to compare five hundred mutual funds ? we just want simple ways to manage our finances and save a little money.

Recent posts

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of
The Christian Science Monitor
Weekly Digital Edition

"My husband and I are shopping very seriously for houses right now. We will likely be in a home by the start of the summer.

I?m writing to you because we?re very unsure about the mortgage. On paper, it makes complete sense to get a fifteen year or even a ten year mortgage. We will pay far less interest over the long run that way.

But then we look at our monthly bills. If we get a ten or even a fifteen year mortgage we will have some enormous monthly bills for the next decade. This will leave us a lot less breathing room each month than the bills for a thirty year mortgage would give us.

It seems like financial sense is pointing us in two different directions."

That?s because financial sense is pointing you in two different directions.

There are really two different schools of thought on this issue that you describe.

One of them focuses heavily on net worth as a financial measure. This focuses on maximizing the gap between what you spend and what you earn over a very long period of time ? say, thirty years.

The other focuses heavily on cash flow as a financial measure. This focuses on maximizing the gap between what you spend and what you earn over a much shorter period of time ? say, a single month.

The problem is that the only way to know which path is absolutely right is to be able to see the future. If everyone could peer into the future and know when all of the big unexpected events were going to hit their life, then they could focus almost entirely on net worth with just a bit of flexible planning to make sure that those big events were handled well.

We don?t have that crystal ball, though. We don?t know when we?re going to face a job loss or a dehabilitating illness or injury. When those types of things happen, you?re much better off with cash flow rather than a path leading to net worth.

If you could know that nothing severely bad was going to happen in the next ten years, then you would be a fool not to get the shortest possible mortgage. If you could know that several bad things were going to happen over the next decade, you?d be a fool to get the mortgage with the highest monthly payments.

Obviously, a balance between the two is best, and it?s that balance that leads to advice like keeping one?s mortgage payments to within 28% of one?s monthly income, for example. A cash flow focus would push that lower, and a net worth focus would push that percentage a bit higher.

One important thing to remember is that once you?re past the first five years of your mortgage, you?re somewhat out of the ?danger zone.? You?ll have equity in the house and be able to sell it with some financial return.

So, what should Jennifer do?

If I were her, I?d actually examine many of the non-financial elements of my life. Do you have dependents? Do you have a strong family network around you? Is your job highly secure ? a government job, for example? Do you have a lot of professional contacts that could easily be tapped to find more work in a pinch? Are you self-reliant and willing to do things like repair your own home or car or plant your own garden? Are you in good health? Are your dependents in good health?

The more secure those elements of my life are, the more I would lean toward the shorter-term mortgage ? a net worth based approach, in other words. The less secure those elements in my life are, the more I would lean toward the longer-term mortgage ? a cash flow based approach, in other words.

Personal finance is a whole-life concern. It?s not just about dollars and cents. The relationships you have, the career you?ve chosen, your health ? they?re all factors.

The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on www.thesimpledollar.com.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/MLanSVjpYQ8/Shorter-mortgage-or-lower-monthly-bills

honor killings mary tyler moore x games pro bowl 2012 rick santorum daughter gainesville 2012 royal rumble

Penn State baseball drops two games on opening weekend

By Wynton J. Somerville

After opening the season with a well-rounded victory against East Tennessee State on Friday, Penn State?s fortunes turned with the weather. Facing poor conditions on Saturday and Sunday, the Lions dropped two straight, ultimately losing the series to the Bucs on Sunday, 9-7.

?The Friday night game I couldn?t be more happy,? coach Robbie Wine said. ?Guys competed, guys executed, made plays, we only had four strikeouts, no errors, our pitchers made plays, we moved runners. Saturday it was the total opposite and it was the same today. Weather was not good either day but both teams played in it.?

The Bucs jumped out Sunday when junior Clinton Freeman drove in two runs with a homer in the bottom of the first off of sophomore Patton Taylor.

The Lions got it going in the top of the third when redshirt junior Steve Snyder lined a double to right field. He was driven in next at-bat by freshman James Coates. The outfielder stole second and scored when junior Luis Montesinos singled to left field to tie the game at 2-2.

After three straight scoreless innings, the Bucs got to Patton Taylor in the bottom of the fifth. The Bucs? Jeremy Taylor reached based on an error by Montesinos.

When freshman Kevin Phillips reached base on a single, the sophomore began to lose his control, hitting the next batter. With the bases loaded, Mason Hershey grounded out, driving in a run. A walk and then a double led to two more runs. Taylor was pulled for sophomore Ryan Harper, but not soon enough to stop the bleeding.

A sac fly, another double, a wild pitch and yet another error allowed the Bucs to post seven runs in the frame and take a commanding 9-2 lead. Wine attributed several factors to the rough inning.

?Errors and poor pitches, just not making our pitches when we needed to and not coming up with a double play or a stop of the ball,? Wine said. ?Every game has moments where you either win or you lose. Seven runs in an inning, you have to minimize that? It just kind of snowballed and got out of control.?

The Lions began to fight back with when freshman Tyler Kendall scored on a sac fly in the seventh. The scoring continued with two runs in the eighth on a base hit and a fielder?s choice.

In the ninth, Montesinos reached base on a single with two outs and advanced to second on an error. A two-run homer by sophomore J.C. Coban brought the Lions within two, but sophomore Aaron Novak lined out to end the game.

Wine looks at the disappointing weekend as a learning experience for his team.

?Those days were pretty tough out there,? Wine said of Saturday and Sunday. ?Especially with being on the road and first time experiencing that for a lot of these guys, so we need to keep working at it, working to get better.?

Source: http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2013/02/18/Baseball_gamer.aspx

madonna half time show fiat 500 abarth madonna halftime m i a mia super bowl tom coughlin wes welker