Thursday, October 18, 2007

 

No war, no warming

From Paul Encimer:

"All issues are created equal ," say organizers of NO WAR, NO WARMING, "when the
health and sanity of our community is at stake.". The event -held at the Mateel Community Center on Sunday Oct. 21st from 1 to 5 PM - emphasizes the connections between Global Climate Crisis and the war for global resources.

There will be tables galore offering information and discussion on the varied approaches activists, organizers, business people and individuals are taking to resist and repair. As a participant, you are encouraged to pull up a chair and promote your solutions to our common crisis.

Here will be a chance as well to check with the experts on your ecological footprint, your small planet diet, the status of your current technological fixes and your place in a truly local economy. The Mateel's stage will provide an open mike for rapping, for theater and for song. Upstairs there will be a full program of up to the moment videos, including the latest from such as Norman Solomon and Naomi Klein.

NO WAR, NO WARMING on Sunday Oct. 21st from 1 to 5 is our local contribution to a nation-wide event which culminates in Washington D.C. on Monday Oct.22 with a mobilization before Congress. Activists from many perspectives are taking the opportunity to underline the need for urgent action from our federal representatives. On the Northcoast, we will be meeting at 10 am that day at Congress member Mike Thompson's offices in Eureka and Ft. Bragg. (Carpooling at the Redway P.O. at 9 am.)

Admission is free. All donations will go to the Mateel Community Center, which graciously provides the venue. More info call 923 4488

Chart comes from Politics Blog. Click on it to enlarge.

Comments:
For paranoids, by paranoids. Go if you want to wallow in ignorant fear mongering.
 
Good to see Paul Encimer doing something so noble. I'm sure it will drive David Cobb crazy to see such a wonderful event with the Democracy Limited crew nowhere near the stage.
 
A waste of perfectly good electricity.
 
Junk Science: Hey Al Gore, We Want a Refund!

FOXNEWS.COM
Friday, October 19, 2007
By Steven Milloy

A British judge ruled on the eve of Al Gore co-winning the Nobel Peace Prize that students forced to watch "An Inconvenient Truth" must be warned of the film’s factual errors. But would there be any science at all left in Gore’s "truth" if these errors and their progeny were excised?

Minutes of non-science filler dominate the opening sequence — images of the Gore farm, Earth from space, Gore giving his slideshow and the 2000 election controversy. Gore then links Hurricane Katrina with global warming. But the judge ruled that was erroneous, so the Katrina scenes would wind up on the cutting-room floor.

Another 12 minutes of filler go by — images of Gore in his limo, more Earth photos, a Mark Twain quote, and Gore memories — until about the 16:30 minute mark, when, according to the judge, Al Gore erroneously links receding glaciers — specifically Mt. Kilimanjaro — with global warming.

The Mt. Kilimanjaro error commences an almost 10-minute stretch of problematic footage, the bulk of which contains Gore’s presentation of the crucial issue in the global warming controversy — whether increasing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide drive global temperatures higher. As the judge ruled that the Antarctic ice core data presented in the film "do not establish what Mr. Gore asserts," this inconvenient untruth also needs to go.

After still more filler footage about Winston Churchill, the 2000 election, and rising insurance claims from natural disasters, Gore spends about 35 seconds on how the drying of Lake Chad is due to global warming. The judge ruled that this claim wasn’t supported by the scientific evidence.

More filler leads to a 30-second clip about how global warming is causing polar bears to drown because they have to swim greater distances to find sea ice on which to rest. The judge ruled however, that the polar bears in question had actually drowned because of a particularly violent storm.

On the heels of that error, Gore launches into a 3-minute "explanation" of how global warming will shut down the Gulf Stream and send Europe into an ice age. The judge ruled that this was an impossibility.

Two minutes of ominous footage — casting Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) in a creepy light and expressing Gore’s frustration with getting his alarmist message out — precede a more-than-9-minute stretch that would need to be cut.

In this lengthy footage, Gore again tries to link global warming with discrete events including coral reef bleaching, the melting of Greenland, catastrophic sea level rise, Antarctic melting and more. But like Hurricane Katrina, these events also shouldn’t be linked with global warming.

Based on the judge’s ruling, the footage that ought to be excised adds up to about 25 minutes or so out of the 98-minute film. What’s left is largely Gore personal drama and cinematic fluff that has nothing to do with the science of climate change.

It should also be pointed out that Gore makes other notable factual misstatements in the film that don’t help his or his film’s credibility.

He says in the film that polio has been "cured," implying that we can cure "global warming." While a preventative polio vaccine does exist, there is no "cure" for polio.

Gore attempts to smear his critics by likening them to the tobacco industry. In spotlighting a magazine advertisement proclaiming that "more doctors smoke Camel than any other brand," he states that the ad was published after the Surgeon General’s 1964 report on smoking and lung cancer. But the ad is actually from 1947 — 17 years before the report.

Gore also says in the film that 2005 is the hottest year on record. But NASA data actually show that 1934 was the hottest year on record in the U.S. — 2005 is not even in the top 10.

Perhaps worse than the film’s errors is their origin. The BBC reported that Gore knew the film presented incorrect information but took no corrective steps because he didn’t want to spotlight any uncertainties in the scientific data that may fuel opponents of global warming alarmism.

"An Inconvenient Truth" grossed about $50 million at the box office and millions more in DVD and book sales. Gore charges as much as $175,000 for an in-person presentation of his slide show that forms the basis for the film.

Considering that a key 25 percent of "An Inconvenient Truth" is not true — and perhaps intentionally so — it seems only fair that Gore offer a refund to moviegoers, DVD/book purchasers and speaking sponsors. Where are the class action lawyers when you need them?

Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com and DemandDebate.com. He is a junk science expert and advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
 
Lest we forget the human contribution to CO2 and global warming is negligible but it's the thought that counts...perhaps..
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
When did you become such a right winger Stephen?
 
http://forumpolitics.com/pics/ipcc-global-warming-chart.bmp

Holy Christ Eric! You're using the famous hockey stick diagram to prove global warming! You funny, sad twat!

Funny thing is, I tend to believe global warming (and it is just belief: it IS a scientific call that is not believed by most climate scientists in surveys), and so no strong feelings (just like I am with everything else I suppose).

And what do I get? People like you, arguing with famous fallacies. Thanks for helping me out there.

By the by, the one thing I've never heard refuted is the 6,000 year cycles: you've given the 100 and 1,000 year ones, but you notice the cycle that makes everything look normal (because this is how it's looked for hundreds of cycles) is the one you ignore.

You know, I seem to be the only person alive who believes in global warming who seems to REFER TO THE COUNTER-EVIDENCE AND NOT CHERRY PICK MY OWN.

You're not a scientist. And you know nothing.
 
I've seen nothing in the 6000 year cycle argument data which suggests anything like the spike within a couple of centuries indicated on the graph Jim. If the graph is premised on false data, then fine. Show me. But don't tell me there was a two century spike anything like the present one indicated on the northern hemisphere graph.

15 thousand years ago the San Francisco Bay was a valley with rivers. Nobody saying there hasn't been gradual warming, which would probably continue with ebbs and flows from hot to cold.

It's the spike which raises the concern. The spike's congruence with the industrial revolution may very well be coincidence. But it still raises a legitimate concern.
 
That British judge is not a scientist either and his ruling has been proven to be based on his faulty understanding of the documentary and science. He is only an obscure judge. Why are so many people acting like he has some noble truth? Isn't it funny that so many who scream about the activism of US judges are so willing to accept the ruling of this one?

Fingersfly
 
Here is information about what the judge got completely wrong.

http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2007/10/gore_take_the_prize_british_ju.php

I would add that the South Pacific Islands in question are Tuvalu. You can read about what they are facing here:

http://www.tuvaluislands.com/news/archives/2006/2006-03-03.htm
 
It didn't all paste, sorry.

http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2007/10/gore_take_the_prize_british_ju.php
 
The REST of it is:

ake_the_prize_british_ju.php

For some reason it just won't all paste.
 
Oh golly. If I post a reference from a free enterprise website promoter, I'm a "rightwinger". I guess with this sort of thinking, when I post references from the Talmud exposing anti-Gentile teachings to Jews, that makes me an advocate of Judaism.
 
I'm not an expert on global warming so I'm agreeing that it's happening with caution as there are larger climate cycles that tend to indicate this current warming is not that out of step with those longer climate cycles that may very well depend on the sun's distance from the earth or its intensity of output.

But if activists here are really serious about climate change, they aught to get behind using Nature's CO2 scrubbers, young growing forests, instead of always promoting old growth forests which do relatively little to take carbon out of the atmosphere. I think its around one two-by-four board six feet long that is storing 5 lbs of carbon taken out of the atmosphere.

Grow more trees, use more wood, never recycle paper but landfill it and use more, build more wood homes and commercial buildings, in other words, do everything opposite of what enviros told you to do if you really want to help reduce carbon in our atmosphere.
 
omg you are cretinous, Stephen

SHUT THE FUCK UP
 
Poor Stephen can't see the forest for the trees. Forests are not just trees. They are the whole web of life in that system from the microbes in the soil to the mountain lions, bears, and spotted owls. Tree farms are not forests. Forests are valuable to the earth without serving man.
 
Someone forgot to tell anon 2:15 that human beings are part of the ecology system.
 
What effect would there be on the earth and all other creatures if man were to become extinct?
 
What if soil microbes became extinct?
 
What if a giant asteroid hits the earth and wipes out most all life on land and sea. Ooops, been there, done that and here we are..
 
Do you always miss the point by such a wide margin, Stephen? The point was that humans are not the most important species on earth for the survival of the rest. The higher on the food chain you sit, the less importance you have for all the other species. Get it??? We need other species, they don't need us.
 
Wrong. We are the stewards of the life of our community. We inherited the biblical truth when we acquired the ability to change the earth's climate. Climate change means changing ecological conditions for forests and grasslands which means now instead of trees and grasses being the dominant species determining all the rest of land life communities, we are the dominant species because we can effect climate conditions. That makes us responsible for what happens and you, anon, need to wake up out of your dreamworld.
 
You are incredibly delusional, Stephen. You obviously don't have a clue about biology. But at least NOW you are admitting that man IS changing the climate. Too bad you are too dense to understand the catastrophic effect that is having on the planet and hence on ourselves and every other species. Parasites kill their host mindlessly too. Or are you claiming we are changing the climate deliberately?
 
Are you for real? Are you actually one of those immoral idiots who believe human beings should be wiped out so "Nature" can live without our interference?

And you claim I don't know anything about biology? You need to go to HSU tomorrow and talk with real live biology teachers and give them your anti-human spiel and see how far you get with it in sympathy for your cause.

Also, you could use a lesson or three thousand in local history to find out just how much local ndns deliberately managed local forests.
 
Strawman Stephen. No where did I say that humans shouldn't exit. You obviously can't argue against my facts so are trying to argue against what I never said. You are pathetic.
 
And deliberately managing forests is not deliberately changing the climate. Are you really this ignorant Stephen, or just pretending?
 
. No where did I say that humans shouldn't exit.

I am losing patience with these nut cases that think we can simply escape to another planet. Get your head out of the clouds and try learning a little bit about what it means to be a steward of this planet.
 
Which nutcase are you referring to? Using my statement and then that post implies that you think I am advocating escaping to another planet. That is not the case in the slightest. My view is that we need to learn to live a sustainable lifestyle HERE. That means not using up the "principle" of our resources and live only on the "interest."

Fingersfly
 
BTW, the scariest of the nutcases are those who think what we do here doesn't matter because all the "good" people are going to escape to heaven soon.

Fingersfly
 
And I'm accused of creating a strawman. Fingersfly, that's so old now, it's a pathetic joke in Christian circles. And you too must not get it, the FACT now that humans have dominion over the planet's eco-systems, just like Genesis said, because we do affect climate conditions which it turn affect the former climax species, trees and grasses, which determined what animals species were there, now that's all changed with human domination of most primary eco-systems.

Whether we like it or not, whether we want it or not, we human beings have the responsibility to steward the planet and its life. And that doesn't mean ignoring human beings or wishing they were dead and departed but dealing effectively with the situation as it really is.

If you don't like so many humans, read up on the history of modern population declines to see your choices: civil wars in which major civilian populations are killed, forced sterilization and criminalization of parents with too many kids, or lifting up lagging pre-industrialized economies so that the standard of living is greatly improved: this works as Japan and Europe showed the world while China's draconian method works only with force and creates a backlash of angry Chinese families.

If you ignore human beings in your ecology saving equations you are only playing Dr. Strangelove in an ELF costume.
 
Way to go Paul! but you must know that global warming and violence are not
the most important problems in the world today
 
Stephen,
With every post you only demonstrate your ignorance and functional illiteracy. You need to get your nose out of the bible and read some actual science.

Strawman argument means you ignore what your opponent in the debate is saying and fabricate what you wish they were saying so you can defeat it. You are incapable of understanding simple statements and have never refuted any of my actual argument. But you are obviously just a waste of time so I will ignore you like the rest of the posters do.

Fingersfly
 
...all the good people are going to escape to heaven soon.

Have a nice exit and we won't miss you.
 
One last comment for Stephen, Genesis is in the old testament. You know the same book that says the Jews were given Israel by god and that they would inherit the earth?

Do you pick and choose what to believe from the old testament, Stephen? LMFAO!!

Fingersfly
 
Fingers Fly, You moron, there weren't any Jews at the time of Genesis. FYI, there's more than one book in the Old Testament, you idiot. Maybe, just maybe, if you'd get your nose out of that tofu you'd see that it's you that can't see that it's the Bible that speaks to us of man's stewardship of the planet.

You may wish to 'exit' to another world but those of us who are willing to be responsible will be right here on Planet Earth continuing to clean up the mess you left behind. And btw it may not be heaven that you exit to, but "another place" instead.
 
"Strawman argument means you ignore what your opponent in the debate is saying and fabricate what you wish they were saying so you can defeat it."

When people project their fears onto to others they often are ignorant of what they are doing, as you are, fingers fly. Please re-read the real live strawman argument. Here it is again:

"BTW, the scariest of the nutcases are those who think what we do here doesn't matter because all the "good" people are going to escape to heaven soon."

Fingers, you are making a strawman Christian that I am not, as are many millions of other Christians, seeing how Christianity comes in all sorts of shades and flavors.

Also, I do know my Bible better than you it seems because when one reads those Genesis verses carefully where the god of Abraham promises the land of Canaan Abraham's descendents, one discovers the promise of the land of Canaan was made to ALL of Abraham's descendants, three different times, to ALL of them, Ishmael's descendants included. Only once, is the promise narrowed down to the descendants of Isaac, Jacob and Judah, and then we have to ask ourselves, just who wrote this stuff?

Why the priests and scribes of Judah! How convenient the tribal god of Judah is God and how convenient Jews are the tribal god's special people.

Then when you really start checking the historical facts, you can find out Abraham was really a god himself as was his wife, Sarah, so it makes everything the god Abraham's god say, as purely religious tribal mythological bullshit.
 
Jews and Judaism were only God's pack horses carrying the Messianic spiritual concept from ancient Canaan to the time of Christ. From then on, Judaism is totally irrelevant spiritually and was consumed with materialism and idolatry of the Jewish faith and now idolatry of the Jewish Israel.
 
Idolatry is evident when idolaters are willing to kill innocents in order to appease the Idol.
 
I just can't resist this...

Do you think Adam and Eve wrote Genesis, you cretin?

I am beginning to understand why Stephen isn't banned. You keep him around for comic relief.
 
Silly me, I thought Jews and Christians were monotheists. Who knew they had so many gods and demi-gods. LMAO!!!
 
HISTORICAL FACTS from the BIBLE???

You are certifiably INSANE Stephen.

I prefer the historial facts from Grimm's Fairy Tales. Much happier endings :P
 
The term 'cretin' is no longer considered to be politically correct nomenclature.
 
You'll get more facts about history from any Harry Potter book than you'd get from the bible.
 
Much happier endings :P

Shall we call you Hansel, or Gretel? You sound like the type of person who likes burning witches alive.
 
Actually I AM a witch :)
 
Isn't a burned witch a happier ending than Armageddon? I sure think so.
 
God wrote Genesis on his 'scroll' which is otherwise known as DNA. Humans translated it. There were a few misguided interpretations in the translating but the main idea of the garden, the tree, the goddess, and the spiraling serpent is there.
 
Actually I AM a witch :)

Yes sure, but are you a 'jewish' witch? Can you show me how to climb into an oven?
 
An old charred skinned crone, deep in the forest, with two plump little cretins on the table, fresh out of the oven and stuffed with
their own trail of breadcrumbs is a happy ending.
 
Many of the myths of the bible are much older than Judaism and were co-opted from pagans who inhabited the region before the Hebrews and other barbarians swept in from the wilderness and stole their cultures and land, slaughtering most but not all of the original inhabitants. They didn't have a problem with virgin women for some reason. :O

The Garden of Eden myth, in particular, can be found in much earlier cultures such as Mesopotamian and Sumerian. It is an allegorical description of Neolithic civilization as is the expulsion from the garden myth relating to the pagan eviction from the garden by the barbaric patriarchs. Cain and Abel is about the conflict between the earlier agrarian people (offering of fruit of the ground) and the later pastoral people (sacrificing animals). The Song of Solomon is known to be segments of pagan songs to the goddess. Like all co-optations, they turned the myths upside down to fit their own mythology and justify their religious domination.

I recommend Rianne Eisler's "The Chalice and the Blade" and / or Merlin Stone's "When God was a Woman" for in depth information on this subject.

But the sheeple must have their superstitions and the rulers their tools of control and on it goes.

I wish people with the "god gene" would become sterile.
Fingersfly
 
LMAO 12:24 and 1:31!


Fingersfly
 
... the expulsion from the garden myth relating to the pagan eviction from the garden by the barbaric patriarchs.

Aw gee those poor victims, the pagans, once again they get the shaft. But then who is the serpent? What is represented in the allegory by him, or is it a her? Is it the serpent that told the witches and pagans it's OK to eat little children like Hansel and Gretel? No wonder the Dad kicked those pagans and witches out of His garden. The thought of it, eating someone's children! And especially after their Father said not to. Is that all you witches care about? That's pretty grim. And history tells us that another German, Hitler, was also into the occult, witchcraft, genocide, and that sort of thing. What does that tell ya? Did you know that in his formative years Hitler's parents read to him from Grimm's fairy tales as well as the Bible?

That's where the Illuminati got the idea to heat up the Earth and bake us all as they exit to another planet. Maybe you think you're going with them? Think again.
 
The serpent was the symbol of wisdom as is still seen on the Caduceus (symbol for physician) and rebirth of nature each spring (the snake is "reborn" when it sheds its old skin). It's significance was changed (co-opted) to suit the new people in control.

And no, myths of witches, Jews, etc. eating children were just another method of control, demonizing that which you can't control. The millions of primarily women murdered during the holocaust against pagans were killed for the same reason. They wouldn't surrender control of their lives to patriarchal domination and many nonpagan women (and men) were accused of witchcraft and murdered just because the church wanted their property.
Fingersfly
 
You have some knowledge but do you have any
wisdom?
 
What is wisdom to one person can be an absurdity to another.

I don't believe in any superstitions. The idea of god seems to me to be a simplistic explanation for the origin of life and an unsuccessful placebo for the fear of death for very primitive people with almost no science. My personal belief (don't laugh now) is that sex is the origin of the idea of god. That is how almost all species are created, afterall. There is also the matter of the many cultures that practiced ritual sex as a means to reach god, priestesses who brought men to god through sex, etc. for thousands of years. Probably another reason the patriarchal religions were so condemning and controlling of the only act that does create life.

Fingersfly
 
Fingers fly, now we know why you are another one holding schizoid views. You, like eric, have no contact with God and are morally rudderless blowing with the winds of politically correctness and no wisdom.
 
Wasn't that an Elton John song?
 
Calling oneself ‘Witch’ does not make a Witch . A Witch seek to control the forces within her/himself that make life possible in order to live wisely and without harm to others and in harmony with nature.
 
I know all about every one of your historical facts about Jews borrowing heavily from pagans and yet unlike you, God hasn't shut off my spiritual receptors and has given me wisdom to see why such borrowings happened and how it all goes towards spiritual awakening of the conscience within human beings.

The atheists never get it that they are not fully functioning on all brain cylinders, that those areas of their brains that are functioning in others, e.g. the whole right hemisphere for starters, and selective sites for spiritual reception (Google and see the lit please before going off thinking there are no such receptors). Without these areas of your brain functioning you are just like color-blind people telling everyone else there are no colors to be seen--it's all black and white and grey when there's a rainbow of millions of colors.

Don't be halfwits, atheists. Start exercises for developing access to your right brain hemispheres and find out why God and spiritual reality never goes away.
 
Fingers Fly said, You need to get your nose out of the bible and read some actual science... sex is the origin of the idea of god.

Ah! Now I get the meaning of your name.
 
LMAO Anonymous 5:25, but no. My name is because I type very fast.

Stephen is a good example of a specimen with a very pronounced "god gene." Notice his circular logic, unrecognized contradictory belief systems, inability to think critically, comprehend what he reads and fanaticism? If you don't know about the "god gene" do yourself a favor and google it. Time magazine did a fascinating article about it a few years ago.
Fingersfly
 
Fingerfly, crummy putdowns and assorted lies about me don't do anything for you but make you look like an ass. You type, you criticize, but you don't do jack to influence anyone in our community. I do.
 
How would you know what I do, Stephen? You don't know who I am. :)

Fingersfly
 
Science may or may not support the theory of Global Warming, but the evidence seems solid that stress increases your chance of having a heart attack.

I'm only telling this because I love you.

Cool down.
 
I wish that message was for me.
 
Stevo doesn't know the difference between a strawman argument and stereotyping.
 
gosh im soooo bored but anyway lets see -- the gingerbraed house symbolizes the mushrroom in the foreast, teh strawman is the kinding for the fire, the stove is planet Earth heeting up, the snake is really teh chicken bone in the litttle boy Hansells pocket that he pocketed or co-opted or whatever to decieve the wicked wiccan witch with, the tree of life is not in the forest, it IS the forest... and the tree of knowledge is in downtown Gville in back of the Blewroom...

did i pass teh test?.. and LOL but anyway, if you nibble\ the miushroom, my dear little Hansel- you wont regretel it .. heehee, and within five minutes-- prestomanifesto! the waicked whitch apppears!!! and she trys to tell yuo that she's a bear, a female bare LOL, which is true... but maybe you should keep that under yr cap nonetheless cuz thats the kind of truth that if you experess it theyll call yuo skiziod... lol, an thats reely raelly inncorrect cuz its been scientifficlly proven that the goddess is actualy a bipolar bear. . . but most folks still dont get that -- theyre not even aware that the cap on thier very own head is melting.....

baking Ge\ingerbraed,
S
 
Cut back on the shrooms, Suzy.
 
You just got a whole string of Stephen and you're telling SUZY to cut back on the shrooms?
 
Stephen's mental status would probably be improved by eating shrooms. :)
 
Or are you claiming we are changing the climate deliberately?

Of course not, all that diesel just pumped itself into the back of that 4x4...yea, or MOORE FUEL came and forced a delivery upon them. And then, alas, the generator must have sucked it up all by itself, and fired up for a 24/7 run of ..oh..like.. 7 years? (I kidd you not, my neighbor, she is like, "that generator has been running nonstop since I moved in - 5 years ago!!") They even have f-ing christmas lights, or is it northern lights? Gimme a big global warming break. YES we are deliberately changing the climate, and the health of our watersheds, for money.
 
The fact that we are thoughtlessly causing global warming is not the same as deliberately causing it. Most of the damage was done before we knew anything about it. That is not to excuse us for doing nothing now.
 
hl0FcV Your blog is great. Articles is interesting!
 
xR6vae Nice Article.
 
Magnific!
 
Hello all!
 
Thanks to author.
 
lu7C9e Good job!
 
Good job!
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Free Website Counter
Free Web Site Counter

Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
To see more details, click here.
Click for www.electoral-vote.com