I doubt there are many Democrats who would want to entertain the thought of Donald Trump winning on November 8th.  That's traditional, long-time registered Democrat voters rather than the more recent, brash, Sanders insurgency supporting youth who so nearly upset the convention.  And yet there may be a case - which some hard-core Sandersites have long endorsed - for suggesting that a Trump win would be the better option for the long-term future of liberalism in America.

If Hillary Clinton wins the presidency then her very tenure will reinvigorate the Republicans in Congress, united in their bid to frustrate her at every turn.  It will likely give Paul Ryan, the House Speaker, an even higher profile and a leading role in not only refurbishing the Republican image - something he is desperate to do - but also in running for the presidency in four years time.  A Clinton presidency will also leave the substantial army of Trump supporters wholly unsatisfied, and ready to back either Trump or similarly iconoclastic right-wingers next time round, when they can point to four more years of "Democrat misrule" and establishment alienation.

A Clinton presidency might even engender a constitutional crisis.  While Trump said he would support Clinton as president if she won the election on November 8th., he has made enough noises previously to suggest that he and his supporters consider the whole electoral system rigged against them, and would use that as justification to dispute another Democratic victory.  Edward Foley on Politico has shown how such a challenge might work given the partisan nature of America's state operated electoral decision machines.

Should Trump actually win, a whole new scenario emerges (I know, I know....a contender for statements of the blinding obvious).  Given Trump's maverick approach to politics, and the division he has already inflicted on the Republican party, the Democrats can look forward to four years of ever increasing Republican turmoil as House and Senate Republicans try and deal with an unpredictable, and essentially non-party, president.  Four years of President Trump also provides even his hardest core supporters with the irrefutable evidence of not just how damaging such a presidency might be, but more importantly show them just how little he is able to change.  When no wall goes up - or at best a small symbolic one - and immigration doesn't cease; when terrorist attacks continue; when Trump's pally approach with a politically superior Vladimir Putin fails to bring gains to America and merely makes her look like an international patsy; when Trump's economic decision making fails to match the promise he has given of work for all those disenchanted, unemployed voters; when race relations hit a nadir and riots envelop the cities on a scale not seen since the 60s; when the economy tanks under the weight of an illiterate economic stategy; when all this and more happens do we really think the Trump brand will retain its potency in the re-election battle of 2020?

In such circumstances, the Democrats could nominate a new, fresh face, reinvigorate their liberal appeal, shore up their popular support across a variety of groups - the young, the black, the female, the Hispanic - and storm to victory not just in the race for the White House but also in the House and the Senate, probably for a generation at least.

The only question is - would four years of Trump be an acceptable price to pay for such future largesse?

Plenty of keyboards have already been called into action to provide quick analyses of last night's stormer of a presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  To give just a flavour of some of the more prescient online commentary, this is the Washington Post take from Dana Milbank; Howard Kurtz gives a pretty balanced view from the right of the spectrum on Fox News; while the liberal viewpoint is most articulately expressed by Michelle Goldberg on Slate.  Politico meanwhile remains a forcing house of regular and detailed commentaries.

The commentariat consensus is that Hillary won - and unequivocally so.  Even Trump surrogate Rudy Giuliani admitted as much in a tweet he sent.  But Giuliani's tweet also offers - unusually - a proper cautionary note for the Clintonites.  She may win the debate and the plaudits of political insiders, as well as those voters who are more politically switched on than their peers.  Whether the debate will have translated that into an appeal to those who are largely alienated by politics is another matter, and Trump's one decent gambit last night was to keep identifying Clinton with the "failed" political establishment.

We already know that the hard-core Trump supporters will never be convinced by anything other than what Clinton characterised as a "Trump reality" that bears little relation to facts.  What Clinton needed to do was to try and win back some of that support which she appeared to have after the Democratic convention but which has dissipated over the course of the summer.

Certainly Mrs. Clinton exceeded expectations in the debate, while Trump probably came in under his.  All the more remarkable given that expectations for Clinton were already high - she was seen as a capable and professional debater who masters her brief exceptionally well - and those for Trump were correspondingly low - he was seen as a man of bluster and bluff with little regard for the facts.

It turned out to be Clinton who scored the more aggressive hits, on Trump's income tax returns, his "stiffing" of ordinary workers who worked for his companies, or his racism over the Obama Birther affair.  She maintained poise, looked relaxed, went in for the kill with appropriate but not over the top aggression.  She arguably didn't press one or two issues enough.  She could have pressed further on his tax returns, or seized upon his implicit admission that he hadn't paid federal tax in years.  She could have pressed on his pursuit of Obama's birth well after the president made his birth certificate public.  She could have been specific in calling him out as an early supporter of the Iraq war.  But these are quibbles.  The debate went well for her.  The only issue is whether it will have been enough to bring voters back into the fold.

For Trump, the issue is a little different.  He has defied all expectations and all campaigning conventions to get where he is today - that is, within a whisker of winning the White House.  No-one expects him to be articulate, no-one even really expects him to understand and ally himself with facts or, more broadly, the truth.  None of his nearly 40% of hard-core supporters are going to move away from him simply because his blustery one-liners didn't work in a debate, or because he was called out on various contortions of reality, or even because he is a giant narcissist who only talked about himself.  So emotionally based is his appeal that it is impervious to facts and events.   I thought one of his most astute points was when he noted that Clinton had spent hundreds of millions of pounds on television adverts attacking him, while he had spent nothing, and yet they were still level-pegging in the polls.

Trump is the anti-candidate, and to succeed he just needs to continue to exist.  The real issue for America in November is whether enough American voters - especially those in the so-called swing states - are nihilistic, alienated and angry enough to tell reality to go hang and put Trump in the White House.  We already know he can't get there because he is better qualified, or more astute, or has a better understanding of politics, or is a more eloquent and articulate speaker.  He is none of these things and Clinton beats him handily on each one.  Her unpopularity remains mysterious in many ways for a woman who has genuinely dedicated herself to a lifetime of public service, and who has come up from relatively humble origins.  But she is now the single most lethal personification of the politics of old, of the establishment, and if enough people are alienated from all of that, then she can't win them over.

This is an election between primal instinct and rational thought, and rational thought has an uphill battle.  That is why it may not matter that Hillary Clinton won the debate.  Donald Trump isn't campaigning that way, and his support base isn't interested.  So if you haven't yet seen it yet do watch it and enjoy - it was a great and rumbustuous debate (although the audience should have been allowed to make more noise!).  But for all the viewership - the highest for any presidential debate - it may not have mattered much.

Explore 10 things you may not know about the 16th U.S. president.

1. Lincoln is enshrined in the Wrestling Hall of Fame.
The Great Emancipator wasn’t quite WWE material, but thanks to his long limbs he was an accomplished wrestler as a young man. Defeated only once in approximately 300 matches, Lincoln reportedly talked a little smack in the ring. According to Carl Sandburg’s biography of Lincoln, Honest Abe once challenged an entire crowd of onlookers after dispatching an opponent: “I’m the big buck of this lick. If any of you want to try it, come on and whet your horns.” There were no takers. Lincoln’s grappling exploits earned him an “Outstanding American” honor in the National Wrestling Hall of Fame.

2. Lincoln created the Secret Service hours before his assassination.
On April 14, 1865, Lincoln signed legislation creating the U.S. Secret Service. That evening, he was shot at Ford’s Theatre. Even if the Secret Service had been established earlier, it wouldn’t have saved Lincoln: The original mission of the law enforcement agency was to combat widespread currency counterfeiting. It was not until 1901, after the killing of two other presidents, that the Secret Service was formally assigned to protect the commander-in-chief.

Abraham Lincoln circa 1846.

3. Grave robbers attempted to steal Lincoln’s corpse.
Secret Service did come to Lincoln’s protection, but only in death. In 1876 a gang of Chicago counterfeiters attempted to snatch Lincoln’s body from his tomb, which was protected by just a single padlock, in Oak Ridge Cemetery in Springfield, Illinois. Their scheme was to hold the corpse for a ransom of $200,000 and obtain the release of the gang’s best counterfeiter from prison. Secret Service agents, however, infiltrated the gang and were lying in wait to disrupt the operation. Lincoln’s body was quickly moved to an unmarked grave and eventually encased in a steel cage and entombed under 10 feet of concrete.

4. John Wilkes Booth’s brother saved the life of Lincoln’s son. 
A few months before John Wilkes Booth assassinated Lincoln, the president’s oldest son, Robert Todd Lincoln, stood on a train platform in Jersey City, New Jersey. A throng of passengers began to press the young man backwards, and he fell into the open space between the platform and a moving train. Suddenly, a hand reached out and pulled the president’s son to safety by the coat collar. Robert Todd Lincoln immediately recognized his rescuer: famous actor Edwin Booth, brother of John Wilkes. (In another eerie coincidence, on the day of Edwin Booth’s funeral—June 9, 1893—Ford’s Theatre collapsed, killing 22 people.)

5. Lincoln is the only president to have obtained a patent.
Benjamin Franklin isn’t the only American political leader who demonstrated an inventive mind. After being aboard a steamboat that ran aground on low shoals and had to unload its cargo, Lincoln, who loved tinkering with machines, designed a method for keeping vessels afloat when traversing shallow waters through the use of empty metal air chambers attached to their sides. For his design, Lincoln obtained Patent No. 6,469 in 1849.

6. Lincoln personally test-fired rifles outside the White House.
Lincoln was a hands-on commander-in-chief who, given his passion for gadgetry, was keenly interested in the artillery used by his Union troops during the Civil War. Lincoln attended artillery and cannon tests and met at the White House with inventors demonstrating military prototypes. Although there was a standing order against firing weapons in the District of Columbia, Lincoln even test-fired muskets and repeating rifles on the grassy expanses around the White House, now known as the Ellipse and the National Mall.

Edwin Booth, brother of John Wilkes, as Hamlet in 1870. 7. Lincoln came under enemy fire on a Civil War battlefield. When Confederate troops attacked Washington, D.C., in July 1864, Lincoln visited the front lines at Fort Stevens on two days of the battle, which the Union ultimately won. At one point the gunfire came dangerously close to the president. Legend has it that Colonel Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., a future Supreme Court justice, barked, “Get down, you fool!” Lincoln ducked down from the fort’s parapet and left the battlefield unharmed.

7. Lincoln came under enemy fire on a Civil War battlefield. 
When Confederate troops attacked Washington, D.C., in July 1864, Lincoln visited the front lines at Fort Stevens on two days of the battle, which the Union ultimately won. At one point the gunfire came dangerously close to the president. Legend has it that Colonel Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., a future Supreme Court justice, barked, “Get down, you fool!” Lincoln ducked down from the fort’s parapet and left the battlefield unharmed.

8. Lincoln didn’t move to Illinois until he was 21.
Illinois may be known as the Land of Lincoln, but it was in Indiana that the 16th president spent his formative years. Lincoln was born in a Kentucky log cabin in 1809, and in 1816 his father, Thomas, moved the family across the Ohio River to a 160-acre plot in southern Indiana. Lincoln did not migrate to Illinois until 1830.

9. Poisoned milk killed Lincoln’s mother.
When Abraham was 9 years old in 1818, his mother, Nancy, died of a mysterious “milk sickness” that swept across southern Indiana. It was later learned that the strange disease was due to drinking tainted milk from a cow that had ingested poisonous white snakeroot.

10. Lincoln never slept in the Lincoln Bedroom.
When he occupied the White House, the 16th president used the current Lincoln Bedroom as his personal office. It was there that he met with Cabinet members and signed documents, including the Emancipation Proclamation.

Arctic sea ice extent in 2016 was the lowest since satellite measurements started, when extent is averaged over the period from March 20 to September 22, as illustrated by the image below.

As the added trend also illustrates, this decline in Arctic sea ice extent looks set to further accelerate and result in a dramatic fall in albedo. The trend points at zero sea ice over this entire period in less than two decades from now.

Zero sea ice on a single day looks set to occur much earlier; a similar trend points at minimum sea ice extent reaching zero in about a decade from now, as illustrated by the image below.

Above image also shows average sea ice extent data for the period January 1 to September 22, i.e. the year to date (blue line). The added trend points at zero being reached in 2037. The data show that Arctic sea ice extent also was the lowest since satellite measurements started, when extent is averaged over the period from January 1 to September 22.

Finally, the image also shows data for the average sea ice extent over the entire year. Data for 2016 are not available yet, but it does look like 2016 will also be have the lowest sea ice extent when averaged over the entire year.

Anyway, the period between the equinoxes of March 20 and September 22/23 is most important, as the Arctic receives most sunlight during this period. This is illustrated by the image on the right and by he image below, from an earlier post, which further shows that the amount of solar radiation received by the Arctic at the time of the June Solstice is higher than anywhere else on Earth.

Thick sea ice covered with snow can reflect as much as 90% of the incoming solar radiation. After the snow begins to melt, and because shallow melt ponds have an albedo (or reflectivity) of approximately 0.2 to 0.4, the surface albedo drops to about 0.75. As melt ponds grow and deepen, the surface albedo can drop to 0.15, while the ocean reflects only 6% of the incoming solar radiation and absorbs the rest.


As Professor Peter Wadhams, University of Cambridge, once calculated, a collapse of the sea ice would go hand in hand with dramatic loss of snow and ice cover on land in the Arctic. The albedo change resulting from the snowline retreat on land is similarly large as the retreat of sea ice, so the combined impact could be well over 2 W/sq m. To put this in context, albedo changes in the Arctic alone could more than double the net radiative forcing resulting from the emissions caused by all people of the world, estimated by the IPCC to be 1.6 W/sq m in 2007 and 2.29 W/sq m in 2013.

Professor Peter Wadhams on albedo changes in the Arctic

Collapse of the sea ice could occur even faster than decline of sea ice extent may indicate.

Rapid loss of sea ice thickness has taken place over the years, as discussed in a recent post. A trend based on PIOMAS volume data (preliminary for 2016) points at a collapse around December 2021/January 2022, as illustrated by the graph below.

Indeed, Professor Peter Wadhams warned about this in 2012: "global warming will increase the intensity of extreme weather events, so more heavy winds and more intense storms can be expected to increasingly break up the remaining ice, both mechanically and by enhancing ocean heat transfer to the under-ice surface."

Thin sea ice is more vulnerable to the stronger storms that can be expected to hit the Arctic Ocean during the northern summer more frequently, and they could push huge amounts of ice out of the Arctic Ocean.

The sea ice acts as a heat buffer by absorbing energy in the process of melting. In other words, as long as there is sea ice, it will absorb heat and this will prevent this heat from raising the temperature of the water in the Arctic. Once the sea ice is gone, this latent heat must go elsewhere.

As the sea ice heats up, 2.06 J/g of heat goes into every degree Celsius that the temperature of the ice rises. While the ice is melting, all energy (at 334J/g) goes into changing ice into water and the temperature remains at 0°C (273.15K, 32°F).

Once all ice has turned into water, all subsequent heat goes into heating up the water, at 4.18 J/g for every degree Celsius that the temperature of water rises.

The amount of energy absorbed by melting ice is as much as it takes to heat an equivalent mass of water from zero to 80°C. The energy required to melt a volume of ice can raise the temperature of the same volume of rock by 150º C.
This buffer is now largely gone and further decline of Arctic sea ice means that a lot more heat will be absorbed by the Arctic.

As the water of the Arctic Ocean keeps warming, the risk increases that methane hydrates at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean will destabilize. Increases in temperature due to albedo changes and methane releases in the Arctic will go hand in hand with further feedbacks, in particular increased levels of water vapor in the atmosphere.

Here's the danger: As decline of the snow and ice cover in the Arctic continues and as more methane gets released from the seafloor, temperatures will rise rapidly, triggering further feedbacks such as a rise of water vapor in the atmosphere. Keep in mind that what makes heat unbearable is a combination of high temperatures with high humidity levels. Furthermore, water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas that will further accelerate the temperature rise. Taken together, we are facing the possibility of a 10°C temperature rise within one decade.

The image below, from the extinction page, shows that we may well be on a trend that is rising even faster than the rapid temperature increases in 2016 may indicate. Indeed, a large part of global warming is currently masked by aerosols and, as we make progress with the necessary shift to clean energy, the full wrath of global warming looks set to become manifest soon.

Risk is the product of probability and severity. The risk of a 10°C temperature rise is incalculably high. On the severity dimension, the impact of such a temperature rise is beyond catastrophic, i.e. we're talking about extinction of species at massive scale, including humans. On the probability dimension, this outcome appears to be inevitable if no comprehensive and effective action is taken.

Above danger assessment adds a third dimension, i.e. timescale. A 10°C temperature rise could eventuate within one decade and this also makes the danger imminent, adding further weight to the need to start taking comprehensive and effective action, as described in the Climate Plan.

I wrote the July portion of this post over a month ago and then it just sat in my drafts folder until today, when I was going to start an August post and....voila and oops, there it was!  SO this is going to be a combined belated effort! 

July:  July is one of those months that always flies by. It is usually full of summer outings, camping, family and fun. You just can't sit inside in July; in fact I can't even get any chores done, as there is so much fun stuff to do! Needless to say, my garden is a bramble and my fridge looks like a cross between Siberia and the Amazon (empty but tangled?) as I have not been home enough to care for it!

Running: In July, I ran about 240 miles. This was the month with the ramp up and the taper for my 100 mile race at the beginning of August. The first couple of weeks were 70 - 80 miles and the last couple of weeks were very little miles (40ish). In addition I had a week off where I went running almost every day, with the highest day being 40 miles, which was the Rae Lakes loop (beautiful).

Reading: Not surprisingly, this was not a good reading month for me. I read 4 books, but it was hard, as I was traveling with other people a lot, as well as training for my race. (Books are starred for RHC, bolded for my own).

Fangirl (3 stars)
Death of a Salesman (2 stars)*
City on Fire (3 stars)
Blanche on the Lam (2 stars)*

Travel: I had a great time in July! I went to Tahoe a couple of times, to Yosemite once and up to my parents neck of the woods for a family gathering. My favorite part was...everything!

August: August is usually full of birthdays and outings and trips, and this year was no exception!

Running: I attempted to run another 100 mile race, this time in Colorado, but once again, I did not finish. Due to this, I ran about 156 miles. This included 50 miles of Silverheels for myself and a pacing stint in Leadville, which was about 20 miles.

Reading: I only read three books and they were:

1000 Lashes: Because I Say What I Think (2 stars)*
The Doubters Almanac (3 stars)
A Darker Shade of Magic (5 stars)

Travel: I went to Colorado twice in August; as stated above, once for my own race and once to pace a friend in Leadville. I am not a huge fan of the Denver airport (or highway 70) but I became very familiar with it in August. In addition, I had one weekend where I stayed home (blissful) and one weekend where I went to visit my parents.

So there you have it, my summer in a nutshell. It is a bit late, but I think that just shows that it was fun!!

How was your summer? Are you ready for Fall? What was the favorite part of your summer?

[ click on images to enlarge ]

On September 10, 2016, Arctic sea ice reached the second lowest extent measured by satellites since 1979, as the image on the right shows. Arctic sea ice took over second-lowest position with an extent of 4.137 million square km. This was 17,000 square km lower than the 2007 minimum, which was 4.154 million square km on September 18, 2007, according to NSIDC data.

Also note the purple line for 2010 on this image. In early September 2010, some people thought a low was reached (on September 12, 2010), but then a much lower extent was reached later (on September 21, 2010).

As the image below shows (screenshot from the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), 2016 Arctic sea ice extent (red line) has declined over the past two days.

Arctic sea ice extent may well decline further over the coming days. The image on the right shows a temperature anomaly forecast for September 24, 2016. This gives an idea of the temperature anomalies that can be expected over the Arctic Ocean over the upcoming week. Temperature anomalies over the Arctic as a whole will be above 2 degrees Celsius for almost that entire period.

There is scope for further sea ice decline, for a number of reasons [hat tip to Albert Kallio]:
- high air temperatures over the Arctic Ocean
- warm river water runoff
- high temperatures of the water in the Arctic Ocean
- very thin and fractured sea ice
- increased wave action of the ocean on sea ice
- increased vertical overturning of ocean water
- increased sea ice migration to absorb more heat from water
- increased sea ice transportation to the Atlantic Ocean / melt areas
- decreased snowline and albedo leading to higher insolation
- high and rising levels of greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O and water vapor) over the Arctic, trapping more heat

The video below shows that high temperatures are forecast over the Arctic Ocean over the upcoming week.

The time-lapse video below is based on NSIDC data and shows the age of sea ice in the Arctic from week to week since 1990, updated through the March 2016 winter maximum. The oldest ice (9 or more years old) is white. Seasonal ice is darkest blue. Old ice drifts out of the Arctic through the Fram Strait (east of Greenland), but in recent years, it has also been melting as it drifts into the southernmost waters of the Beaufort Sea (north of western Canada and Alaska).

The Naval Research Lab animation below show Arctic sea ice thickness over 30 days (up to September 16, 2016, with a forecast added up to September 23, 2016).

The Naval Research Lab sea ice speed and drift animation below over the same period shows that the amount of sea ice that is expected to move into Fram Strait is expected to increase over the next few days.

The image below shows that on September 24, 2016, it was as warm as 5.1°C or 41.1°F at a location where there still is some of the thicker Arctic sea ice left, with the inset showing Arctic sea ice on September 22, 2016.

The image below shows areas with some of the thicker sea ice on September 18, 2016.

The image below shows that sea surface temperatures on September 18, 2016, were much higher than they were in 1981-2000, especially at higher latitudes.

The image below shows September 18, 2016 sea surface temperature anomalies in the Arctic (latitudes 60°N - 90°N) compared to 1961-1990.



The danger is that, as temperatures of the water of the Arctic Ocean keep rising, heat will reach sediments at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean containing methane hydrates that are on the verge of destabilization. A small increase in temperatures could trigger huge abrupt release of methane from the seafloor of the Arctic Ocean.

The image below shows that on September 14, 2016, methane levels at 367 mb were as high as 2697 ppb and global mean methane level was as high as 1865 ppb.

The image below shows wildfires in Russia on September 18, 2016.

The image below shows that on September 18, 2016, these wildfires resulted in carbon monoxide levels as high as 24,309 ppb (top), and carbon dioxide levels as high as 612 ppm (bottom).

The image below shows that, on September 19, 2016, carbon monoxide levels were as high as 38,035 ppb (green circle left) and carbon dioxide levels were as high as 701 ppm (green circle right).



The situation is dire and calls for comprehensive and effective action, as described in the Climate Plan.


Links

• Arctic Sea Ice September 2016
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2016/09/arctic-sea-ice-september-2016.html

• Storms over Arctic Ocean
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2016/08/storms-over-arctic-ocean.html

• Wildfires in Russia's Far East
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2016/08/wildfires-in-russias-far-east.html

• Arctic Sea Ice Getting Terribly Thin
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2016/08/arctic-sea-ice-getting-terribly-thin.html

• High Methane Levels Follow Earthquake in Arctic Ocean
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2016/07/high-methane-levels-follow-earthquake-in-arctic-ocean.html

We are all aware of Parachute Coconut Oil. It’s perhaps the most famous hair oil used since several generations in many Indian families. Here is a photo that will remind you of many memories:

Did you notice that the bottle does not write “hair oil” on it?

It just writes “coconut oil”, even though majority of consumers use it like a hair oil. 

Actually -

• Coconut oil is an edible product, and it was not liable for excise duty.
• Hair oil is a cosmetic product, and it is liable for excise duty.

So what is Parachute Oil ? Is it an edible product or a cosmetic product?

---

For years, the government and the company have been fighting over it. The government said that this product is a cosmetic item and therefore should be liable for tax. As a counter, the company (Marico) said that the packaging does not mention this product as a hair oil and is actually intended to be used as an edible item.

So when the Government claimed that parachute coconut oil is in fact a hair oil (which, by the way, for all practical purposes, it is); the company refuted the claim by saying that it is neither branded nor marketed as a hair oil. And the company is not accountable for how the consumers are actually using it.

The Government further raised a question that if indeed the coconut oil was an edible product, then why would the company package it in sachets, such as these -

The government wanted to prove that the product is indeed intended to be sold as a hair oil.
In response to this, the company said that such smaller packing was useful for students and other such people who wanted to use the cooking oil for small purposes and not store it. And in this whole case, the company was constantly avoiding the payment of tax on a product which was obviously used as hair oil in most of the country.

---

The government came out with a simple solution: they changed the law!
New law said that any coconut oil with a packaging lesser than 200 ml would be treated as a cosmetic product; and any size above that would be treated as an edible item.
This circular affected the company a lot, since a big portion of their sales was in the below 200 ml segment, which was now liable for tax. Obviously, the company decided to appeal against this circular to the higher authorities.
There were a lot of cases in the Tribunal and also the courts, which said that merely because the packing is smaller, it cannot be classified as a hair oil. In view of the same, the Government then withdrew that circular.
Note:

• Parachute Coconut Oil even has an FSSAI approval, is necessary for edible products.                                   
• It also has the green vegetarian symbol on it which denotes that it is a vegetarian edible item.

1. Room 39, North Korea – Kim Jong’s Secret Vault

It’s hard enough getting into North Korea, imagine trying to get into Room 39! It’s a secretive North Korean government facility that’s said to be home to several illegal operations including counterfeiting $100 bills, production of drugs (including methamphetamine and heroin) and international insurance fraud. Many claim that Room 39 is critical to Kim Jong’s continued power, enabling him to buy political support and fund North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. Yikes!

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Bohemian Grove – A secret society of the most powerful!

Just like some cult thriller film, Bohemian Grove is a 2,700 acre rural location somewhere in Monte Rio, California. The land is owned by private San-Fran based arts club known as, well … the Bohemian Club. Every summer, the club host a two-week, three weekend camp in the woods for the most powerful men in the world.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Svalbard Global Seed Vault – You know where to go in case Apocalypse actually takes place

Built out of the fear that those science-fiction scenarios when the world comes to an end might come true, Svalbard Global Seed Vault, located in the North Sea is home to 250 million crop seeds shipped from gene banks worldwide. The estimated cost of this place exceeds $9 million dollars.

Unless you’re a designated researchers or plant breeders you’re not allowed inside the vault. If in case you ever enter the vault you’d be the only hope for agriculture during a polar ice cap melt or any other Earthly disaster!

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. North Sentinel Island, Andaman – Where the deadliest tribe resides

A group of indigenous people known as the Sentinelese live in the North sentinel Island of Andaman in Bay of Bengal. The estimated population of the island is between 50 and 400. These people are considered to be the last people on earth to remain virtually untouched by modern civilization.

Attempts to contact the tribe have been met with hostility. People have been attacked by arrows and stones if you get too close to their area. In fact on 26 January 2006, two fishermen were killed when their boat drifted near the island.

Nanotechnology is one of the most popular areas of scientific research, especially with regard to medical applications. It is one of the new detection methods that brings about cheaper, faster and less invasive cancer diagnoses. If scientists can load their cancer-detecting gold nano particles with anticancer drugs, they could attack the cancer exactly where it lives. Such a treatment means fewer side effects and less medication used. Nano particles also carry the potential for targeted and time-release drugs. A potent dose of drugs could be delivered to a specific area but engineered to release over a planned period to ensure maximum effectiveness and the patient's safety.

A Cancer Tumor absorbing nutrients from a blood vessel to survive

Nanotechnology based synthetic spheres projecting light beams on a tumor to detect and cure cancer

1. GPS Coordinate of pyramid of Giza = 29.979245, 31.134269
Speed of light = 299792458 m/s
We can see so much similarity between them.
Proof: Open Google map, search for pyramid of Giza, zoom it in and click on top of pyramid, check the coordinates; or open Google map, put 29.979245,31.134269 in the search box. It will take you to Pyramid of Giza.


2. Egyptians have oriented the Pyramid of Giza so precisely that it is pointing north within 5 hundredths of the degree of accuracy.
FYI: Forget about compass, Egyptians even did not have knowledge of wheels.
     
 
3. Pyramid of Giza has 8 sides (not 4 sides). It’s all 8 sides are visible only on equinox.

Ariel view of Pyramid of Giza taken on equinox:

4. In Hypostile room, Temple of Abydos, Egypt Chopper, Submarine and Tank are engraved.