Apple Answers FCC Questions (Old Post from Apple.com)

* Apple

* Store

* Mac

* iPod + iTunes

* iPhone

* Downloads

* Support

Search ____________________

Apple Answers the FCC’s Questions

Today Apple filed with the FCC the following answers to their

questions.

We are pleased to respond to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau’s

inquiry dated July 31, 2009, requesting information regarding Apple’s

App Store and its application approval process. In order to give the

Bureau some context for our responses, we begin with some background

information about the iPhone and the App Store.

Apple’s goal is to provide our customers with the best possible user

experience. We have been able to do this by designing the hardware and

software in our products to work together seamlessly. The iPhone is a

great example of this. It has established a new standard for what a

mobile device can be–an integrated device with a phone, a full web

browser, HTML email, an iPod, and more, all delivered with Apple’s

revolutionary multi-touch user interface.

Apple then introduced something altogether new–the App Store–to give

consumers additional functionality and benefits from the iPhone’s

revolutionary technology. The App Store has been more successful than

anyone could have ever imagined. Today, just over a year since opening,

the App Store offers over 65,000 iPhone applications, and customers

have downloaded over 1.5 billion applications.

The App Store provides a frictionless distribution network that levels

the playing field for individual and large developers of mobile

applications. We provide every developer with the same software that we

use to create our own iPhone applications. The App Store offers an

innovative business model that allows developers to set their own price

and keep more (far more in most cases) of the revenue than traditional

business models. In little more than a year, we have raised the bar for

consumers’ rich mobile experience beyond what we or anyone else ever

imagined in both scale and quality. Apple’s innovation has also

fostered competition as other companies (e.g., Nokia, Microsoft, RIM,

Palm and Verizon) seek to develop their own mobile platforms and launch

their own application stores.

Apple works with network providers around the world so that iPhone

users have access to a cellular network. In the United States, we

struck a groundbreaking deal with AT&T in 2006 that gives Apple the

freedom to decide which software to make available for the iPhone. This

was an industry first.

We created an approval process that reviews every application submitted

to Apple for the App Store in order to protect consumer privacy,

safeguard children from inappropriate content, and avoid applications

that degrade the core experience of the iPhone. Some types of content

such as pornography are rejected outright from the App Store, while

others such as graphic combat scenes in action games may be approved

but with an appropriate age rating. Most rejections are based on bugs

found in the applications. When there is an issue, we try to provide

the developer with helpful feedback so they can modify the application

in order for us to approve it. 95% of applications are approved within

14 days of their submission.

We’re covering new ground and doing things that had never been done

before. Many of the issues we face are difficult and new, and while we

may make occasional mistakes, we try to learn from them and continually

improve.

In response to your specific questions, we would like to offer the

following:

Question 1. Why did Apple reject the Google Voice application for

iPhone and remove related third-party applications from its App

Store? In addition to Google Voice, which related third-party

applications were removed or have been rejected? Please provide

the specific name of each application and the contact

information for the developer.

Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google

Voice application, and continues to study it. The application

has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it

appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by

replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and

Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone

calls, text messaging and voicemail. Apple spent a lot of time

and effort developing this distinct and innovative way to

seamlessly deliver core functionality of the iPhone. For

example, on an iPhone, the “Phone” icon that is always shown at

the bottom of the Home Screen launches Apple’s mobile telephone

application, providing access to Favorites, Recents, Contacts, a

Keypad, and Visual Voicemail. The Google Voice application

replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a

separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any

voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone,

i.e., disabling Apple’s Visual Voicemail. Similarly, SMS text

messages are managed through the Google hub–replacing the

iPhone’s text messaging feature. In addition, the iPhone user’s

entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and

we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data

will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present

several new issues and questions to us that we are still

pondering at this time.

The following applications also fall into this category.

+ Name: GVDialer / GVDialer Lite

Developer: MobileMax

info@mobile-mx.com

+ Name: VoiceCentral

Developer: Riverturn, Inc.

4819 Emperor Blvd., Suite 400

Durham, NC 27703

+ Name: GV Mobile / GV Mobile Free

Developer: Sean Kovacs

sean@seankovacs.com

We are continuing to study the Google Voice application and its

potential impact on the iPhone user experience. Google is of

course free to provide Google Voice on the iPhone as a web

application through Apple’s Safari browser, just as they do for

desktop PCs, or to provide its “Google-branded” user experience

on other phones, including Android-based phones, and let

consumers make their choices.

Question 2. Did Apple act alone, or in consultation with AT&T, in

deciding to reject the Google Voice application and related

applications? If the latter, please describe the communications

between Apple and AT&T in connection with the decision to reject

Google Voice. Are there any contractual conditions or

non-contractual understandings with AT&T that affected Apple’s

decision in this matter?

Apple is acting alone and has not consulted with AT&T about

whether or not to approve the Google Voice application. No

contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with

AT&T have been a factor in Apple’s decision-making process in

this matter.

Question 3. Does AT&T have any role in the approval of iPhone

applications generally (or in certain cases)? If so, under what

circumstances, and what role does it play? What roles are

specified in the contractual provisions between Apple and AT&T

(or any non-contractual understandings) regarding the

consideration of particular iPhone applications?

Apple alone makes the final decisions to approve or not approve

iPhone applications.

There is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that

obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone

that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service

to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining

AT&T’s permission. Apple honors this obligation, in addition to

respecting AT&T’s customer Terms of Service, which, for example,

prohibit an AT&T customer from using AT&T’s cellular service to

redirect a TV signal to an iPhone. From time to time, AT&T has

expressed concerns regarding network efficiency and potential

network congestion associated with certain applications, and

Apple takes such concerns into consideration.

Question 4. Please explain any differences between the Google Voice

iPhone application and any Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)

applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone. Are any of

the approved VoIP applications allowed to operate on AT&T’s 3G

network?

Apple does not know if there is a VoIP element in the way the

Google Voice application routes calls and messages, and whether

VoIP technology is used over the 3G network by the application.

Apple has approved numerous standard VoIP applications (such as

Skype, Nimbuzz and iCall) for use over WiFi, but not over AT&T’s

3G network.

Question 5. What other applications have been rejected for use on the

iPhone and for what reasons? Is there a list of prohibited

applications or of categories of applications that is provided

to potential vendors/developers? If so, is this posted on the

iTunes website or otherwise disclosed to consumers?

In a little more than a year, the App Store has grown to become

the world’s largest wireless applications store, with over

65,000 applications. We’ve rejected applications for a variety

of reasons. Most rejections are based on the application

containing quality issues or software bugs, while other

rejections involve protecting consumer privacy, safeguarding

children from inappropriate content, and avoiding applications

that degrade the core experience of the iPhone. Given the volume

and variety of technical issues, most of the review process is

consumed with quality issues and software bugs, and providing

feedback to developers so they can fix applications.

Applications that are fixed and resubmitted are approved.

The following is a list of representative applications that have

been rejected as originally submitted and their current status:

+ Twittelator, by Stone Design Corp., was initially rejected

because it crashed during loading, but the developer

subsequently fixed the application and it has been approved;

+ iLoveWiFi!, by iCloseBy LLC, was rejected because it used

undocumented application protocols (it has not been

resubmitted as of the date of this letter);

+ SlingPlayer Mobile, by Sling Media, was initially rejected

because redirecting a TV signal to an iPhone using AT&T’s

cellular network is prohibited by AT&T’s customer Terms of

Service, but the developer subsequently fixed the application

to use WiFi only and it has been approved; and

+ Lingerie Fantasy Video (Lite), by On The Go Girls, LLC, was

initially rejected because it displayed nudity and explicit

sexual content, but the developer subsequently fixed the

application and it has been approved with the use of a 17+ age

rating.

Apple provides explicit language in its agreement with iPhone

developers regarding prohibited categories of applications, for

example:

+ “Applications may be rejected if they contain content or

materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs,

sounds, etc.) that in Apple’s reasonable judgment may be found

objectionable, for example, materials that may be considered

obscene, pornographic, or defamatory; and

+ Applications must not contain any malware, malicious or

harmful code, program, or other internal component (e.g.

computer viruses, trojan horses, `backdoors’) which could

damage, destroy, or adversely affect other software, firmware,

hardware, data, systems, services, or networks.”

And we also provide a reference library that can be accessed by

members of the iPhone Developer Program that lists helpful

information such as Best Practices and How To Get Started.

Question 6. What are the standards for considering and approving iPhone

applications? What is the approval process for such applications

(timing, reasons for rejection, appeal process, etc.)? What is

the percentage of applications that are rejected? What are the

major reasons for rejecting an application?

As discussed in the response to Question 5, Apple provides

guidelines to developers in our developer agreement as well as

on its web site regarding prohibited categories of applications.

These materials also contain numerous other provisions regarding

technical and legal requirements that applications must comply

with, and Apple uses these standards in considering whether or

not to approve applications.

Apple developed a comprehensive review process that looks at

every iPhone application that is submitted to Apple.

Applications and marketing text are submitted through a web

interface. Submitted applications undergo a rigorous review

process that tests for vulnerabilities such as software bugs,

instability on the iPhone platform, and the use of unauthorized

protocols. Applications are also reviewed to try to prevent

privacy issues, safeguard children from exposure to

inappropriate content, and avoid applications that degrade the

core experience of the iPhone. There are more than 40 full-time

trained reviewers, and at least two different reviewers study

each application so that the review process is applied

uniformly. Apple also established an App Store executive review

board that determines procedures and sets policy for the review

process, as well as reviews applications that are escalated to

the board because they raise new or complex issues. The review

board meets weekly and is comprised of senior management with

responsibilities for the App Store. 95% of applications are

approved within 14 days of being submitted.

If we find that an application has a problem, for example, a

software bug that crashes the application, we send the developer

a note describing the reason why the application will not be

approved as submitted. In many cases we are able to provide

specific guidance about how the developer can fix the

application. We also let them know they can contact the app

review team or technical support, or they can write to us for

further guidance.

Apple generally spends most of the review period making sure

that the applications function properly, and working with

developers to fix quality issues and software bugs in

applications. We receive about 8,500 new applications and

updates every week, and roughly 20% of them are not approved as

originally submitted. In little more than a year, we have

reviewed more than 200,000 applications and updates.

1. Home

2. Apple Answers the FCC’s Questions

Shop the Apple Online Store (1-800-MY-APPLE), visit an Apple Retail

Store, or find a reseller.

* Apple Info

* Site Map

* Hot News

* RSS Feeds

* Contact Us

* United States

Copyright © 2009 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.

* Terms of Use

* Privacy Policy

* Apple

* Store

* Mac

* iPod + iTunes

* iPhone

* Downloads

* Support

Search ____________________

Apple Answers the FCC’s Questions

Today Apple filed with the FCC the following answers to their

questions.

We are pleased to respond to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau’s

inquiry dated July 31, 2009, requesting information regarding Apple’s

App Store and its application approval process. In order to give the

Bureau some context for our responses, we begin with some background

information about the iPhone and the App Store.

Apple’s goal is to provide our customers with the best possible user

experience. We have been able to do this by designing the hardware and

software in our products to work together seamlessly. The iPhone is a

great example of this. It has established a new standard for what a

mobile device can be–an integrated device with a phone, a full web

browser, HTML email, an iPod, and more, all delivered with Apple’s

revolutionary multi-touch user interface.

Apple then introduced something altogether new–the App Store–to give

consumers additional functionality and benefits from the iPhone’s

revolutionary technology. The App Store has been more successful than

anyone could have ever imagined. Today, just over a year since opening,

the App Store offers over 65,000 iPhone applications, and customers

have downloaded over 1.5 billion applications.

The App Store provides a frictionless distribution network that levels

the playing field for individual and large developers of mobile

applications. We provide every developer with the same software that we

use to create our own iPhone applications. The App Store offers an

innovative business model that allows developers to set their own price

and keep more (far more in most cases) of the revenue than traditional

business models. In little more than a year, we have raised the bar for

consumers’ rich mobile experience beyond what we or anyone else ever

imagined in both scale and quality. Apple’s innovation has also

fostered competition as other companies (e.g., Nokia, Microsoft, RIM,

Palm and Verizon) seek to develop their own mobile platforms and launch

their own application stores.

Apple works with network providers around the world so that iPhone

users have access to a cellular network. In the United States, we

struck a groundbreaking deal with AT&T in 2006 that gives Apple the

freedom to decide which software to make available for the iPhone. This

was an industry first.

We created an approval process that reviews every application submitted

to Apple for the App Store in order to protect consumer privacy,

safeguard children from inappropriate content, and avoid applications

that degrade the core experience of the iPhone. Some types of content

such as pornography are rejected outright from the App Store, while

others such as graphic combat scenes in action games may be approved

but with an appropriate age rating. Most rejections are based on bugs

found in the applications. When there is an issue, we try to provide

the developer with helpful feedback so they can modify the application

in order for us to approve it. 95% of applications are approved within

14 days of their submission.

We’re covering new ground and doing things that had never been done

before. Many of the issues we face are difficult and new, and while we

may make occasional mistakes, we try to learn from them and continually

improve.

In response to your specific questions, we would like to offer the

following:

Question 1. Why did Apple reject the Google Voice application for

iPhone and remove related third-party applications from its App

Store? In addition to Google Voice, which related third-party

applications were removed or have been rejected? Please provide

the specific name of each application and the contact

information for the developer.

Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google

Voice application, and continues to study it. The application

has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it

appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by

replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and

Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone

calls, text messaging and voicemail. Apple spent a lot of time

and effort developing this distinct and innovative way to

seamlessly deliver core functionality of the iPhone. For

example, on an iPhone, the “Phone” icon that is always shown at

the bottom of the Home Screen launches Apple’s mobile telephone

application, providing access to Favorites, Recents, Contacts, a

Keypad, and Visual Voicemail. The Google Voice application

replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a

separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any

voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone,

i.e., disabling Apple’s Visual Voicemail. Similarly, SMS text

messages are managed through the Google hub–replacing the

iPhone’s text messaging feature. In addition, the iPhone user’s

entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and

we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data

will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present

several new issues and questions to us that we are still

pondering at this time.

The following applications also fall into this category.

+ Name: GVDialer / GVDialer Lite

Developer: MobileMax

info@mobile-mx.com

+ Name: VoiceCentral

Developer: Riverturn, Inc.

4819 Emperor Blvd., Suite 400

Durham, NC 27703

+ Name: GV Mobile / GV Mobile Free

Developer: Sean Kovacs

sean@seankovacs.com

We are continuing to study the Google Voice application and its

potential impact on the iPhone user experience. Google is of

course free to provide Google Voice on the iPhone as a web

application through Apple’s Safari browser, just as they do for

desktop PCs, or to provide its “Google-branded” user experience

on other phones, including Android-based phones, and let

consumers make their choices.

Question 2. Did Apple act alone, or in consultation with AT&T, in

deciding to reject the Google Voice application and related

applications? If the latter, please describe the communications

between Apple and AT&T in connection with the decision to reject

Google Voice. Are there any contractual conditions or

non-contractual understandings with AT&T that affected Apple’s

decision in this matter?

Apple is acting alone and has not consulted with AT&T about

whether or not to approve the Google Voice application. No

contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with

AT&T have been a factor in Apple’s decision-making process in

this matter.

Question 3. Does AT&T have any role in the approval of iPhone

applications generally (or in certain cases)? If so, under what

circumstances, and what role does it play? What roles are

specified in the contractual provisions between Apple and AT&T

(or any non-contractual understandings) regarding the

consideration of particular iPhone applications?

Apple alone makes the final decisions to approve or not approve

iPhone applications.

There is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that

obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone

that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service

to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining

AT&T’s permission. Apple honors this obligation, in addition to

respecting AT&T’s customer Terms of Service, which, for example,

prohibit an AT&T customer from using AT&T’s cellular service to

redirect a TV signal to an iPhone. From time to time, AT&T has

expressed concerns regarding network efficiency and potential

network congestion associated with certain applications, and

Apple takes such concerns into consideration.

Question 4. Please explain any differences between the Google Voice

iPhone application and any Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)

applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone. Are any of

the approved VoIP applications allowed to operate on AT&T’s 3G

network?

Apple does not know if there is a VoIP element in the way the

Google Voice application routes calls and messages, and whether

VoIP technology is used over the 3G network by the application.

Apple has approved numerous standard VoIP applications (such as

Skype, Nimbuzz and iCall) for use over WiFi, but not over AT&T’s

3G network.

Question 5. What other applications have been rejected for use on the

iPhone and for what reasons? Is there a list of prohibited

applications or of categories of applications that is provided

to potential vendors/developers? If so, is this posted on the

iTunes website or otherwise disclosed to consumers?

In a little more than a year, the App Store has grown to become

the world’s largest wireless applications store, with over

65,000 applications. We’ve rejected applications for a variety

of reasons. Most rejections are based on the application

containing quality issues or software bugs, while other

rejections involve protecting consumer privacy, safeguarding

children from inappropriate content, and avoiding applications

that degrade the core experience of the iPhone. Given the volume

and variety of technical issues, most of the review process is

consumed with quality issues and software bugs, and providing

feedback to developers so they can fix applications.

Applications that are fixed and resubmitted are approved.

The following is a list of representative applications that have

been rejected as originally submitted and their current status:

+ Twittelator, by Stone Design Corp., was initially rejected

because it crashed during loading, but the developer

subsequently fixed the application and it has been approved;

+ iLoveWiFi!, by iCloseBy LLC, was rejected because it used

undocumented application protocols (it has not been

resubmitted as of the date of this letter);

+ SlingPlayer Mobile, by Sling Media, was initially rejected

because redirecting a TV signal to an iPhone using AT&T’s

cellular network is prohibited by AT&T’s customer Terms of

Service, but the developer subsequently fixed the application

to use WiFi only and it has been approved; and

+ Lingerie Fantasy Video (Lite), by On The Go Girls, LLC, was

initially rejected because it displayed nudity and explicit

sexual content, but the developer subsequently fixed the

application and it has been approved with the use of a 17+ age

rating.

Apple provides explicit language in its agreement with iPhone

developers regarding prohibited categories of applications, for

example:

+ “Applications may be rejected if they contain content or

materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs,

sounds, etc.) that in Apple’s reasonable judgment may be found

objectionable, for example, materials that may be considered

obscene, pornographic, or defamatory; and

+ Applications must not contain any malware, malicious or

harmful code, program, or other internal component (e.g.

computer viruses, trojan horses, `backdoors’) which could

damage, destroy, or adversely affect other software, firmware,

hardware, data, systems, services, or networks.”

And we also provide a reference library that can be accessed by

members of the iPhone Developer Program that lists helpful

information such as Best Practices and How To Get Started.

Question 6. What are the standards for considering and approving iPhone

applications? What is the approval process for such applications

(timing, reasons for rejection, appeal process, etc.)? What is

the percentage of applications that are rejected? What are the

major reasons for rejecting an application?

As discussed in the response to Question 5, Apple provides

guidelines to developers in our developer agreement as well as

on its web site regarding prohibited categories of applications.

These materials also contain numerous other provisions regarding

technical and legal requirements that applications must comply

with, and Apple uses these standards in considering whether or

not to approve applications.

Apple developed a comprehensive review process that looks at

every iPhone application that is submitted to Apple.

Applications and marketing text are submitted through a web

interface. Submitted applications undergo a rigorous review

process that tests for vulnerabilities such as software bugs,

instability on the iPhone platform, and the use of unauthorized

protocols. Applications are also reviewed to try to prevent

privacy issues, safeguard children from exposure to

inappropriate content, and avoid applications that degrade the

core experience of the iPhone. There are more than 40 full-time

trained reviewers, and at least two different reviewers study

each application so that the review process is applied

uniformly. Apple also established an App Store executive review

board that determines procedures and sets policy for the review

process, as well as reviews applications that are escalated to

the board because they raise new or complex issues. The review

board meets weekly and is comprised of senior management with

responsibilities for the App Store. 95% of applications are

approved within 14 days of being submitted.

If we find that an application has a problem, for example, a

software bug that crashes the application, we send the developer

a note describing the reason why the application will not be

approved as submitted. In many cases we are able to provide

specific guidance about how the developer can fix the

application. We also let them know they can contact the app

review team or technical support, or they can write to us for

further guidance.

Apple generally spends most of the review period making sure

that the applications function properly, and working with

developers to fix quality issues and software bugs in

applications. We receive about 8,500 new applications and

updates every week, and roughly 20% of them are not approved as

originally submitted. In little more than a year, we have

reviewed more than 200,000 applications and updates.

1. Home

2. Apple Answers the FCC’s Questions

Shop the Apple Online Store (1-800-MY-APPLE), visit an Apple Retail

Store, or find a reseller.

* Apple Info

* Site Map

* Hot News

* RSS Feeds

* Contact Us

* United States

Copyright © 2009 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.

* Terms of Use

* Privacy Policy

A Comment of Pwnage

Dear Congress:

Please continue to waste the next 4 years passing stupid legislation like this and no time screwing me over more by passing your cap-and-tax scheme aimed at making BO and Al Gore rich(er), or socializing medicine so that it has to be rationed.

Thank you,

A productive, tax-paying citizen of the USA

http://www.9news.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=120045&catid=337

WASHINGTON – The House of Representatives passed a resolution on Thursday that honored the Los Angeles Lakers for their recent NBA title. But a Colorado congressman voted “no.”

Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colorado) cast one of only eight dissenting votes on the resolution.

The resolution says, in part, “the Lakers, in winning their 15th NBA World Championship, capped a remarkable, unprecedented single-season turnaround that captivated basketball fans across America and around the world.”

But the Lakers’ road to the title went through Denver and they beat the Denver Nuggets to make it to the championship series.

Perlmutter was the only member of Colorado’s delegation to vote against the measure.

(Copyright KUSA*TV, All Rights Reserved)

Google Chrome OS? What About Cloud OS?

With the annoucement of Google Chrome OS, the only thing I can think of is what will happen to Cloud? Cloud is the netbook operationg system, currently in private beta. Good OS has been working on this OS for over a year now, and I think that there might be a legal battle soon if Google Chrome OS turns out to be like Cloud OS. Why? Because, while Google may be one of the biggest companys in the world, that doesn’t mean that they can’t get caught with copyright or trademark violation. I think that Good OS would have a good chance winning a case against Google. Like I said, Cloud was out and in beta before Google Chrome OS was even annouced, so what does that tell you?

http://www.thinkgos.com/cloud/index.html

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html

Furries Invade Pittsburgh for AnthroCon 2009

Every year, furries all over the world gather together for the largest convention of the year, AnthroCon. If you don’t live near Pittsburgh, you probably don’t know what AnthroCon is, or what a furry is, for that matter. No worries, you can find out all about it on their website, http://anthrocon.org . WPXI, a local Television station also has raw video of this year’s Anthrocon http://www.wpxi.com/video/19929000/ .

AnthroCon was held July 2-5 this year.

6/18/09 Quotes, Part 2

The following quotes are from WikiQuote.

The Man in the Fallout Shelter [1.9]

Brennan: I thought that you were at the party.

Booth: Oh, that wasn’t a party. That was a Star Wars convention.

---

Angela: It’s all so tragic. A cheap wedding ring sewn into his suit. Two tickets to Paris. It makes you wonder, who was the girl? Can you imagine what it was like for her, waiting and wondering, never knowing what happened?

Brennan: I don’t have to imagine.

---

Booth: You don’t seem too upset about missing Christmas.

Brennan: Indications are that Christ, if he existed, was born in late spring, and the celebration of his birth was shifted to coincide with the pagan rite of the winter solstice so that early Christians weren’t persecuted.

Booth: What are you, like, the Christmas killer?

Brennan: It’s the truth.

Booth: No, it sounds like the truth because it’s so rational, right? But the… you know, the true truth is you hate Christmas, so you just spout out all these facts and you ruin it for everyone else.

Brennan: I ruin the true truth with facts?

---

Brennan: Anthropologically speaking, gifts are a way of asserting dominance in a group. Now imagine an entire holiday devoted to self-promotion, especially in this materialistic culture. How can you expect me to get behind that? How can you get behind that?

Booth: Wow, that’s… that’s deep. It’s a very deep pile of crap.

Brennan: You came to me with information this morning, a peace offering. But it was to make you feel better, not me. Proves my point.

---

Booth: Okay, could we just stop bringing up the whole Christ myth thing? Some people believe it’s more than just a myth.

Brennan: Well, who besides you?

Dr. Goodman: That would be me, Dr. Brennan. I’m a deacon at my church.

Angela: I do. Christmas and Easter, anyway.

Hodgins: Although I believe organized religion is just another political movement designed to control the masses, it doesn’t mean God doesn’t love me.

Zack: Hey, I’m a rational empiricist all the way, unless you talk to my mother. Then I’m Lutheran.

TV Show Quotes of the Day for Thursday, June 18th, 2009

The Boy in the Tree [1.3]

Zack: She said “Take a hint.” But when I asked “What hint?,” Naomi said if she told me what hint, that it wouldn’t be a hint any more, it would be a statement.

---

Booth: Ah, you know, I’m glad we had that little chat about being nice to the locals.

Brennan: I don’t like sheriffs. They are elected into office, which means their goal is being re-elected, not finding the truth.

---

Booth: I don’t… I don’t like people who think they’re better than other people.

Brennan: Some people are better than other people.

Booth: Uh, you know what you said right there, that is so un-American. All men are created equal; either you believe that or you don’t.

Brennan: Some people are smarter than others; there’s no use being offended by the fact. What are we going to tell Nestor’s parents?

Booth: We tell them that their son was found dead. “We’re looking into it. Sorry for your loss,” and we are.

Brennan: What?

Booth: Sorry for their loss. It’s sad. Try to remember that.

Brennan: Uh, I’m not a sociopath.

Booth: You’re bad with people, okay. No use being offended by the fact.

---

Brennan: You’re the least objective person I have ever met.

Booth: Thank you.

Brennan: It’s not a compliment.

---

Zack: I had sex with Naomi in Paleontology.

Angela: You mean, actually in Paleontology?

Zack: No, at her place. I thought it went great, but I could be wrong, because apparently what I think is wild and kinky is basic. And since she never called me back, I’m wondering if it’s because I lack imagination in the sack.

Angela: You know what, Zack? I’m thinking this is more of a guy-guy conversation.

Unusually Cold Temperatures? Blame it on the Jet Stream

Unusually wet, cool weather not related to monsoons.

When it’s past Memorial Day and the high is only in the 70s, locals start to wonder. And discuss. And dissect. Is it climate change?
Chris Cuoco, a senior forecaster in the Grand Junction office of the National Weather Service said it’s not a mystery, it’s the jet stream.

“During the transition from winter to summer, the jet stream travels from south of us to north of us, but now it’s right across the middle of the United States and right over us,” he said. “It just has stayed in the transition between seasons with one relatively small storm after another.”

Click image to enlarge

Photo by JERRY McBRIDE/Herald photos

Springtime snow fell in the mountains on Coal Bank Pass on U.S. Highway 550 on Wednesday. The San Juan Mountains received a small amount of snow early Wednesday morning, bringing unusually cold temperatures this time of year.

---

Photo by JERRY McBRIDE/Herald photos

Springtime snow fell in the mountains on Coal Bank Pass on U.S. Highway 550 on Wednesday. The San Juan Mountains received a small amount of snow early Wednesday morning, bringing unusually cold temperatures this time of year.

Photo by JERRY McBRIDE/Herald photos

Jennie Sinclair, a wildlife biologist with the Colorado Division of Wildlife, stands at the top of a snowy Molas Pass on Wednesday using a hand-held antenna tracking a lynx in a valley below. Lynx fitted with radio collars are tracked by the DOW. At this time of year, some females have established dens and have had, or are preparing to have, kittens. The DOW’s lynx reintroduction program started in 1999 and is ongoing.

// <![CDATA[// <![CDATA[
var image_count = 2
var image_type = "normal"
function show_img(img_num){
for (i=0;i 1 && image_type != “mug” && image_type != “big”){
for (i = 0; i

The San Juan Mountains received a small amount of snow Wednesday at higher elevations. Cuoco said some of the white stuff may have been hail. The only snow report the weather service office had received was that Ophir, south of Telluride, had received 1 inch of heavy snow.

Some people like the cooler June and others want it to warm up. Cuoco has a personal reason to want higher temperatures.

“I don’t like it because my garden’s not growing,” he said. “My tomato plants are usually 3 feet tall by now, but they’re only a foot and a half or 2 feet high this year.”

The weather has brought one significant advantage to Southwest Colorado, particularly in a year when the snowpack  is a fraction of its average depth.

“It’s usually hottest and very dry now, and we end up with wildfire problems,” he said. “That’s another reason it’s nice.”

Some locals are worried that all this rain in June may diminish the normal monsoon period in July and August. When asked if there’s any truth to the saying “Rains in June, no monsoon,” Cuoco laughed.

“You can add that one to the ‘Junesoons’ that is being bantered about,” he said. “This has nothing to do with the monsoons.”

In the meantime, other parts of Colorado are experiencing strong weather patterns.

Severe weather continues in northern Colorado.

The National Weather Service said another funnel cloud was spotted at 6:19 p.m. Wednesday near the Natural Fort rest area, about 23 miles north of Fort Collins. A tornado warning was in effect for northeastern Larimer County and northwestern Weld County on Wednesday night.

Earlier Wednesday, funnel clouds were spotted near New Raymer and near Windsor as severe thunderstorms moved through the area.

There were no immediate reports of any damage.

Southeastern Colorado was hit by slow-moving thunderstorms, but a flood advisory has now been lifted.

abutler@durangoherald.com

The Associated Press contributed to this story.