OK, some more science. November 30, 2005Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Global Warming, Politics.
add a comment
RightWingNutHouse has yet another excellent post on greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Short synopsis: Antarctic ice core samples show that CO2 levels are at least 27% higher in the past hundred years than they have been at any time in the previous 650,000 years.
OK, that's a strong, enduring correlation. Again, while correlation does not prove causation, it's one helluva compelling correlation.
Now, as the Nut says, can we prove that these levels are tied to a humanogenic rise in global temps?
Not so fast. Among other things, this same core sample discovers that increases in methane produciton, thought to have been associated with domesticated livestock, in fact may have no connectiont to agriculture, but instead may be tied to natural variations in wild woodland and other boreal-area decomposition.
The Nut then goes on to an examination of possible ramifications, especially as they relate to Kyoto.
But why read this, hmmm? Go on over there and read for yourself.
Daughter November 29, 2005Posted by Administrator in Family, Parenting.
add a comment
I’ve spoken of my elder son elsewhere (too lazy to find the link).
Sigh. Oh well. Certainly not the worst choice ever. After all, it could be Eminem or System of a Down. 😛
Supreme Court revisits abortion November 29, 2005Posted by Administrator in Catholicism, Cultural Pessimism, Mechanistic Relativism, Politics.
add a comment
In this case, the right of the parent(s) to know if their daughter is about to have an abortion.
Of interest in the article is the following quote from a 20 year-old college student who had an abortion earlier in her life:
“I decided it was best for me to have an abortion because I did not want to be a parent at that point in my life,” she said.
Now 20 and a college senior, she is speaking out against the state statute.
“These laws are only about eroding access to abortion,” she told CNN. “If you want to talk to your parents, you can do that, but if the state steps in and tells you that you have to do that to protect your reproduction, it is very disappointing.”
The woman in question is summoning age-old NARAL rhetoric in claiming the state is interfering with a woman’s reproductive “freedom”. At the risk of appearing that I am oversimplifying the situation (while in reality I am not), I submit the following solution to the woman’s reproductive “freedom” issues:
Dear, stop having intercourse. Stop trying to have your cake and eat it as well. You are a big girl now, capable of controlling your appetites, sexual and otherwise. Don’t fool around until you are “ready” to have that child (whenever that might be). You are free to have sex. Be prepared to accept the consequences of that exercising that freedom. You are also free to choose not to have sex, thereby enjoying the freedom from responsibility that entails.
It really is that painfully simple.
Momentary Tizzy November 29, 2005Posted by Administrator in Personal.
add a comment
We interrupt the normally scheduled blog for this impromptu tizzy performed by the site’s proprietor.
I have no real difficulty with right-brained people. I in fact tend toward the practice of coming up with ideas, getting part of the way through them, then decamping when I find the blizzard of details too tiresome to contend with.
There are exceptions: Most notably, when the idea I am embarking upon then directly impacts others. Then I must follow through, if for no other reason than for the benefit of those hurt if I do NOT follow through.
Bona fides at least partially established, on to the Rant.
There is a member of the staff(let us call her The Dreamer) I serve on that is notorious for embarking upon Big Ideas, publicly announced for all to see, and assuring all of us who have been left to pick up the pieces of her partially-completed-but-then-abandoned Right Brain disasters that THIS TIME she will follow through.
Given the fact that this staff member is also a serious benefactor of the same organization she works for (Conflict of Interest, anyone?), a tendency on the part of Leadership (usually level-headed but a bit twitchy at the idea of challenging anyone directly tied into the Revenue Stream) to indulge her mad passions at the expense of the rest of us does rear its ugly head. On occasion. On common occasion.
There is a section I and the rest of the staff are not scheduled to manage on Fridays, as the abovementioned Dreamer is in charge of a weekly, company-wide assembly designed to tie the stakeholders most intimately into the mission of our facility.
But, not THIS Friday. Due to poor planning on the part of the Dreamer, she would have to come up with a new means of managing the assembly. As is part and parcel of her job. But, she flat-out bailed, and The Leadership unilaterally decided that we will pick up the Dreamer’s pieces by managing the section we normally would not have to manage.
In fact, we are not PAID for this section. The monies that might normally go towards us for managing this section go instead to the Dreamer to pay for her Right-Brain activities.
But, as the Night follows the Sun, the Dreamer has dropped the ball again, and we get to pick up the pieces.
Which, by itself, would be no big deal, except the Dreamer then compounded her sin by going straight home, TODAY (no doubt to escape the ire of her colleagues who are justifiably resentful of her dropping The Ball yet again), without fulfilling the minor duty of her watching the stakeholders during a daily community gathering. A minor, yet necessary duty. And who got to pick up THAT ball for her today? Yours truly.
I have not even begun to plumb the depths of my vocabulary in ranting about the qualities this woman, as a lead benefactor of some stakeholders at our facility, has used (or misused) in the time I have been there.
For the most part, I very much enjoy my job, the stakeholders, my colleagues (including the Dreamer herself) and everything about it.
But the bloom fades fast when colleagues who do NOT do THEIR job then force those of us around them to do it FOR them. And YES, I AM USING CAPS BECAUSE I AM TICKED!!!!!
OK. Now I feel a bit better. Sorry to subject anyone to that.
First Things November 28, 2005Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Cultural Pessimism, Mechanistic Relativism.
add a comment
There are reasons that I have First Things in my link bar.
Here are a couple of them now (From the December First Things, in Fr. Richard John Neuhaus’s indispensable “While We’re at it” section):
(According to British historian Paul Johnson). . .fervent Darwinists are inadvertently undoing the cause of their champion. “At a revivialist meeting of Darwinians two or three years ago, I heard the chairman. . .call out, ‘Yes, we do think God is an old man in the sky with a beard, and his name is Charles Darwin” I doubt if there is a historical precedent for this investment of so much intellectual and emotional capital, by so many well-educated and apparently rational people, in the work of a single scientist. . .The likelihood of Darwin’s eventual debacle will be sensational and brutal is increased by the arrogance of his acolytes, by their insistence on the unchallengable truth of the theory of natural selection -which to them is not a hypothesis but a demonstrated fact, and its critics mere flat-earthers- and by their success in occupying the commanding heights in the university science departments and the scientific journals, denying a hearing to anyone who disagrees with them.
Shades of religious fervor. Example #2245682 that one CANNOT fully separate religion and state. Nature abhors a vacuum. Take out monotheism and replace it with Darwinism; all the worst features of Christianity in its full ascendancy (or degeneracy) when it fully melded church and state are now in full flower with the Religion of Darwin. (And if ever there was a more reluctant prophet, I’d like someone to point him out. I cannot believe that Darwin would hew to the ravings of his modern followers were he alive today.
Fr. Neuhaus then takes on the “scientific post-humanists”, as exemplified by Ray Kurzweil, who is predicting the coming “Singularity” where technology will “. . .take over from nature in the evolution of the human species.” Neuhaus quotes Robert George, who suggests that the post-humanists have a very sinister intent. . .in short, with the debate surrounding stem cell research, their interest is not in stem cell work, but in out-and-out fetal farming, wherein the fetus is grown with the express purpose of killing it to harvest its biological goods, so to speak.
As Fr. Neuhaus entitles, the little tidbit, “If It Can Be Done, It Will Be Done.”
When will we learn?
In the meantime, subscribe to First Things NOW!!!!!!!
Yet Another Michael Moore Letter to Spoof November 27, 2005Posted by Administrator in Blogging, Cultural Pessimism, Politics.
add a comment
You’d think the idiot would quit while he was already behind. . .
Sorry, George, I’m In the Majority …from Michael Moore
Already off on the wrong foot. . .and the letter hasn’t even STARTED yet.
Dear Mr. Bush:
I would like to extend my hand and invite you to join us, the mainstream American majority. We, the people — that’s the majority of the people — share these majority opinions:
Meaning, of course, that they are your opinions. Of course you provide CNN poll data. . .but isn’t this typical Monday Morning Quarterbacking? Something you are really very good at. (As opposed to filmmaking).
Tell me, Mr. Moore. Let us consider for just a moment that the poll data are accurate. What if the question were skewed just a bit, and asked: “Do you agree with Michael Moore’s views on the war and the Bush Administration?”
I bet we’d get some REALLY different data. . .indicating that you are in fact far from the mainstream.
But that question would never be asked. Too nice to the Bush Administration, don’t you know.
1. Going to war was a mistake — a big mistake.
Nothing is said in the CNN data about “big” mistakes. But your pal Bill Clinton certainly had something to say about it. Stay tuned for coverage on that little tidbit. And see above comment.
2. You and your administration misled us into this war. (link)
And what about the fact that the Clinton Administration gave utter credence to Iraq’s possession of WMDs and intent to produce nuclear weapons?
Oh. I keep forgetting. With you guys, it’s never the message, but the messenger that determines the truth. If Caligula said the sky is blue, then it must be blue. But if Bush says it’s blue, you say it’s been red all along. Funny how you leave out that critical piece of information.
But then, you couldn’t MMQB as effectively, could you?
And notice, it is old Gov. Caligula himself who terms this the “big” mistake? You’re hurtin’, Mike, when you are stealing material from Billary.
3. We want the war ended and our troops brought home. (link)
No duh. So does everyone else. ONCE THE JOB IS FINISHED, FOOL!!! Not even the TROOPS want out before that.
4. We don’t trust you. (link)
. Umm, from you, this is news?
Now, I know this is a bitter pill to swallow. Iraq was going to be your great legacy. Now, it’s just your legacy. It didn’t have to end up this way.
. Screwed up again. Timely, genuine leadership at the time of 9-11 will be his legacy, not to mention actually bringing democracy to that jaded land, despite your terminal treason in hacking at the country’s Achilles tendons every chance you get.
This week, when Republicans and conservative Democrats started jumping ship, you lashed out at them.
HELLO!! WHAT??? A vote of 403-3 to stay until the job is done, and that is jumping ship????
You thought the most damning thing you could say to them was that they were “endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party.”
And you thought you were in the majority.
I mean, is that the best you can do to persuade them to stick with you — compare them to me?
Your point there. This is akin to saying that they are all “fat and ugly.”
Wait a minute. . .
You gotta come up with a better villain.
Whatever for? You spout utter gibberish, you just BEG for attention, and you make a target that is REALLY EASY to hit!!
For heaven’s sakes, you had a hundred-plus million other Americans who think the same way I do — and you could have picked on any one of them!
There’s that majority thing getting in your way again.
But hey, why not cut out the name-calling and the smearing and just do the obvious thing:
Ignore you? That would actually be a wise idea.
Come join the majority! Be one of us, your fellow Americans! Is it really that hard? Is there really any other choice? George, take a walk on the wild side!
I think we’ve already dealt with this.
Your loyal representative from the majority,
. Loyal? You’ve GOT to be kidding me.
The only reason I can see him writing these letters is because he likes to hear himself talk/write. That and he has hordes of adoring, unthinking fans who soak up every word he generates. . .which is depressing in a microcosmic sense. . .and so he can then bask in the further adulation given him for dispensing such “wisdom.”
In short, the guy is an ego freak of the first water.
Nevertheless, the writing and posting of such sententious, disingenuous twaddle serves for some fine cannon fodder.
SUPPORTERS: Please write your own spoofs on your websites. . .or submit them to the e-mail at the bottom of the page. . .and I’ll post the best of ’em here.
Surely someone can do better than me. I mean, I cranked this baby out in less than 10 mimutes.
Link to previous spoof: Spoofing rich fat,unkempt documentary filmmakers.
100 Year-Old Wisdom November 27, 2005Posted by Administrator in Catholicism, Cultural Pessimism, Mechanistic Relativism, Smart People.
add a comment
Back from a Thanksgiving hiatus with no computer access. So, there will eventually be the filling of various odds and ends. Not least of which is commentary on the global warming panic brought about from M. Crichton's thoroughly researched State of Fear.
BUt that is for later.
Right now I want to toss out some quotes from Mr. Gilbert Keith Chesterton from his 1905 "nightmare", The Man Who was Thursday.
Question (From Syme, a law and order type): "You wish to abolish Government?"
Answer (From Gregory, an Anarchist):(We wish) to abolish God!. We do not only want to upset a few despotisms and police regulations. . .we dig deeper and blow you higher. We wish to deny all those arbitrary distinctions of vice and virtue, honor and treachery upon which mere rebels base themselves. We hate Rights and Wrongs. We have abolished Right and Wrong."
Ooh. Where have we heard some of this stuff said recently?
Policeman (a thoroughly enlightened fellow: We say that the most dangerous criminal is the educated criminal. . .the entirely lawless modern philosopher. Compared to him, burglars and bigamists are essentially moral men. They accept the essential ideal of man; they merely seek it wrongly. Thieves respect property. They merely wish that the property become their property so that they may more perfectly respect it. But philosophers dislike property as such; they wish to destroy the very idea of personal possession. Bigamists respect marriage; else they would not go through the highly ceremonial and even ritualistic formality of bigamy. But philosophers despise marriage as marriage. Murderers respect human life; they merely wish to attain a greater fullness of human life in themselves by the sacrifice of what seems to them to be lesser lives. But philosophers hate life itself, their own as much as other people's."
Note with interest the last two: Bigamists and murderers. Even murderers recognize murder for what it is. . .yet the abortionists and euthanists do not. They make it a caricature, a euphemism, so that their own loathing of human life. . .even their own. . .is hidden. As for bigamy, see the current gay marriage brouhaha.
There is so much more. I may post some more as I skip through this delightful trove.
Keep in mind the man copyrighted this book in 1905.
That's 100 years ago, friends. Orwell published 1984 in 1949. Huxley published in 1932. Both essentially warn us of a society managed by the state that succeeds in re-defining reality to fit its own needs and desires. Not to take away from those awesome works, but Chesterton was nailing all the same ills in 1905. The primary difference is that Chesterton was not criticizing an all encompassing state. . .but is it not a bit chillingly ironic that he foreshadows Orwell and Huxley in the painting of their own nightmares? GK covers the same moral ground, the same twisting of fact into fiction and the converse. . .leaving us to consider the potentially devastating consequences for ourselves.
Independence November 23, 2005Posted by Administrator in Politics.
add a comment
I don’t often talk about this. It may come as a surprise to the more entrenched MoonLeft that I am not a Republican. I am a registered Independent.
Part of the reason for this is that I am essentially a cultural conservative; on economic issues I tend to wander from the Right party line, sometimes significantly.
Another reason I am Independent results from a visceral reaction I had against a statement a priest made back in my undergraduate days. This priest, (his name escapes me. He was a little gnome of a man, less than five feet tall with a corresponding voice) was saying during the ’84 elections that one had to pick a party and stay with it, come hell or high water. He was voting for Mondale in that election because he was a Democrat. End of discussion. When asked why he was a Democrat, he replied, “Because they are for the little guy.” Most of this sentiment came from the Democrat’s association with labor unions.
Setting aside the argument that labor unions are actually FOR the little guy or not, I had trouble squaring the idea with the Democrat’s increasing promotion of the unlimited abortion license.
Consequently, I quickly came to the conclusion that the priest was just dead wrong here. Political parties, like any entrenched organization (and yes, trolls, that does sometimes mean the Church as well) can sometimes wander off in the wrong direction. . .and to back them in those times is in essence to disenfranchise yourself. So, I swore to myself I would never affiliate myself with any one party. Hence, my Independence.
Now, RightWingNuthouse has published a short essay that provides the beginning of a different read on the same subject. I urge you, supporters and trolls alike, to go read it right now. It provokes some interesting thoughts and ideas that I think we ALL need to be looking at.
The First Intelligent Quote Ever Seen Re: Global Warming November 22, 2005Posted by Administrator in Global Warming, MSM, Politics.
add a comment
From an otherwise standard, Chicken Little-style CNN article on global warming:
"There is stronger and stronger evidence that there is an anthropogenic (human) element affecting the climate," said Paal Prestrud, head of the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo.
Prestud may well be right. But look at what he said: "There is stronger and stronger evidence."
OK!!WONDERFUL!!! There is a likelihood we are causing it. Excellent. But this it far different from the standard moonbat claims that we ARE causing it.
Truth in advertising. Ain't it wonderful? Kudos to Mr. Prestud for having the cojones to speak the scientific truth, as opposed to the politicized hyperbole.
Here comes the next wave November 22, 2005Posted by Administrator in Catholicism, Cultural Pessimism, Education, Liberal Hypocrisy, MSM.
add a comment
Look out. New York Catholic school sued by the ACLU for firing an out-of-wedlock, pregnant pre-school teacher.
And according to the article (yes, it is from CNN, please apply salt before reading), the previous case law in New York does not bode well for St. Rose of Lima in Queens.
Which is absurd on its face. How can a Catholic institution have any hope of enforcing its teaching if it can’t also reinforce that teaching through the actions of its teachers? Actions -let us remember, people- speak infinitely louder than words.
Of course, the CINOs are chiming in saying that the woman needs to be forgiven. Certainly. Which means she may start over, at another Catholic school if she so chooses, where her teaching reputation is not permanently sullied as it has been at St. Rose.
The ACLU needs to revisit its Gibbon.