White(count me) Christians need to hear what this man says.
James H. Cone
'The Father of Black Theology'
The Cross and the Lynching Tree
''Work to make the world the way it ought to be”
I listened to Mr. Cones' 2006 Ingersol Lecture at Harvard and made these notes.
It is exponentially more powerful to listen to this speech on the Internet.
There is White Gospel and Black Gospel
Black Church Worship transforms a nobody in white society to a somebody in black society.
The contradiction – How is Gods' Love explained to black people over 400 years of white supremacy.
What is the truth of the Gospel-Many preachers, black and white, claim that they have special communication with God. Be wary of these people.
Faith is the primary way to gain knowledge of the gospel, not by how intellectual you are.
The Gospel (Gods Word) is not in this world.
Everyone is corrupted by sin-even theologans and preachers and disciples.
Paul said it this way: Romans: 7 :15-20
I do not understand what I do.
For what I want to do, I do not do,
But what I hate I do.
And if I do what I do not want to do,
I agree that the law is good.
As it is, it is no longer I my self who does it,
But it is sin living in me.
I know that nothing good lives in me, that is,
In my sinful nature.
For I have the desire to do what is good,
but I cannot carry it out.
For what I do is not the good I want to do;
No, the evil I do not want to do-
this I keep doing.
Now if I do what I do not want to do,
It is no longer I who do it,
But it is sin living in me that does it.
Jesus is the physical slave form of the oppressed.
It requires a powerful religious imagination to find life in death and hope in tragedy.
Linking the cross and the lynching tree presents the audacity to challenge supremacy.
Their (the cross and the lynching tree)obcenity(in the original way) is linked.
Black gospel makes beautiful what white supremacy made ugly.
The gospel of Jesus on the cross is not a happy story. It is a story of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat – finding life in death- transforming lynched blacks into a symbol of victory.
The paradox -physical, ugly bodies can be transformed into beauty through faith.
Todays lynching tree- one half of 2,000,000 people in jail in the U.S. Are black.
If you have never been lynched by another group it is hard to understand the need to remember it.
Jesus did not want to die on the cross and blacks did not want to be lynched.
In confronting the legacy of white supremacy there is hope beyond the tragic for all humankind.
Hope beyond the lynching tree.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Climate of Fear
Martin Hertzberg, PhD, a scientist with a meteorological background in the Navy…he had this to say:
As Hertzberg says, water in the form of oceans, snow, ice cover, clouds and vapor “is overwhelming in the radiative and energy balance between the Earth and the sun….
Carbon dioxide and the greenhouse gases are, by comparison, the equivalent of a few farts in a hurricane.” And water is exactly that component of the Earth’s heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for.
Excerpts from the Glenn Beck Show
In the 1970s, global cooling was the consensus. This article from the "L.A. Times" in 1978: "No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere". Or "TIME" magazine`s big spread from 1974, asking "Another Ice Age?" "Newsweek" said global cooling evidence had "begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard pressed to keep up with it." Just switch out warming for cooling, and they`ve written it before. The only thing that has changed is the temperature of the catastrophe. Take a look at this headline for the "New York Times" in 1959 claiming "A Warmer Earth Evident at the Polls". But just two years later, in the same newspaper, we find this: "Scientists Agree World is Colder." Even in the mid-`90s, the "Times" was talking about a frozen earth, except it wasn`t the 1990s. It was 1895. You get whiplash reading these things. Climate changes all the time. Get used to it.
On Inconvenient Truth…..
GORE: There`s not a single fact or date or number that`s been used to make this up that`s in any controversy. Isn`t there disagreement among scientists about whether the problem is real or not? Actually, not really. Meet people that aren`t really real. ROY SPENCER, PHD, FORMER SENIOR CLIMATE SCIENTIST, NASA: Politicians and some of the scientists like to say that there`s a consensus now on global warming or the science has been settled, but you have to ask them, what is there a consensus on? Because it really makes a difference. What are you talking about? The only consensus I`m aware of is that it`s warmed in the last century. They completely ignore the fact that there`s this thing called the Oregon petition that was signed by 19,000 professionals and scientists who don`t agree with the idea that we are causing climate change. JOHN CHRISTY, PHD, ALABAMA STATE CLIMATOLOGIST: One of the statements in the SPM was the statement that, if you boil it down, it says we are 90 percent certain that most of the warming in the last 50 years was due to human effects. I don`t agree with that. I think things are much more ambiguous
How about the so-called hockey stick graph. This is the version shown by Al Gore. However, the original version used by the IPCC contained a wide margin of error not shown in "An Inconvenient Truth." Inconvenient, huh? Critics say there`s even more missing. PATRICK MICHAELS, PHD, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA STATE CLIMATOLOGIST: There are two factors that most climatologists think happened that don`t seem to be included in it, which are the little Ice Age, which is a very cold period that ended in the late 19th century, and the medieval warm period, around 1000 or so. CHRIS HORNER, "POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO GLOBAL WARMING": Since the third U.N. report, for which this was the smoking gun, there`s been a fourth U.N. report. Does anybody see a hockey stick in there anywhere? I can`t see you. It`s not in there. Guess what? It`s air-brushed out, in classic fashion, and they don`t even mention why it`s not here. What hockey stick? I didn`t see any hockey stick.
What about that really cool animation of Florida and Manhattan drowning? Huh, cool, huh? You`ve seen these horrific scenarios everywhere based purely on catastrophic hypotheticals that dramatically exaggerate even what the U.N. says. It`s Al Gore`s best supporting actor, the word "if." GORE: If we have an increase of five degrees, if Greenland broke up and melted...... if this were to go, sea level worldwide would go up 20 feet. MARIO LEWIS, PHD, GOVERNMENT POLICY ANALYST: Where he`s misleading is that he gives the impression that this is something that is likely to happen. The likelihood of this is next to nil. DAVID LEGATES, PHD, CLIMATOLOGIST, UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE: The IPCC report is that the upper limit of sea level rise by the year 2100 is going to be about 23 inches. Al Gore makes up 20 feet. The truth isn`t scary. The bottom line is, no one is denying that the globe has warmed. It has, 0.74 degrees Celsius.But there`s a disagreement on why, and there`s even more disagreement on if it will be catastrophic or not. The tactics Al Gore uses in "An Inconvenient Truth" deserve an Oscar. We all have to remember: There`s a difference between science and science fiction.
A "New York Times" story reported that 84 percent of Americans now see human activity as at least contributing to warming. What they didn`t put in that same story is that 75 percent of those think that it is just one factor of many. Another survey from a New York-based educational provider shows kids are now more scared of global warming than terrorism, cancer and car crashes. The organization that took the survey said one of the main reasons was the media coverage of tragedies, like the tsunami. The tsunami was caused by an earthquake. And as far as is known, even Al Gore isn`t claiming a link between global warming and earthquakes. I think to solve these problems, we need to take a step back. Isn`t it amazing that fossil fuels have become the enemy? The rise in our CO-2 emissions have coincided with the rise in our wealth, our life expectancy, and technological advancement. Fossil fuels are, in some ways, a victim of their own success. They`ve helped us in so many ways: We`ve stopped worrying about whether we can heat our homes or get sick people to the hospital. Instead, we now focus on developing new kinds of energy simply to avoid the possibility of future environmental problems. When you think about the history of the Earth, that`s a pretty good problem to have, isn`t it? Now, that doesn`t mean that we don`t want clean air. No one wants the Earth to die. But it`s what we do about it that`s at question. The correct decisions will not be made when fueled by frantic alarmism. Kids are now being shown "An Inconvenient Truth" completely unchallenged, not just in science class, but in art and math classes. A green hotel in California has just replaced the traditional in-room Bible with an in-room copy of "An Inconvenient Truth." Al Gore`s version of climate change has no longer become science. It`s dogma. And if you question it, you are a heretic. For now, all we can do is look for sober solutions in a world drunk on hysteria. The debate is not over. I have a feeling it`s just beginning.
As Hertzberg says, water in the form of oceans, snow, ice cover, clouds and vapor “is overwhelming in the radiative and energy balance between the Earth and the sun….
Carbon dioxide and the greenhouse gases are, by comparison, the equivalent of a few farts in a hurricane.” And water is exactly that component of the Earth’s heat balance that the global warming computer models fail to account for.
Excerpts from the Glenn Beck Show
In the 1970s, global cooling was the consensus. This article from the "L.A. Times" in 1978: "No End in Sight to 30-Year Cooling Trend in Northern Hemisphere". Or "TIME" magazine`s big spread from 1974, asking "Another Ice Age?" "Newsweek" said global cooling evidence had "begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard pressed to keep up with it." Just switch out warming for cooling, and they`ve written it before. The only thing that has changed is the temperature of the catastrophe. Take a look at this headline for the "New York Times" in 1959 claiming "A Warmer Earth Evident at the Polls". But just two years later, in the same newspaper, we find this: "Scientists Agree World is Colder." Even in the mid-`90s, the "Times" was talking about a frozen earth, except it wasn`t the 1990s. It was 1895. You get whiplash reading these things. Climate changes all the time. Get used to it.
On Inconvenient Truth…..
GORE: There`s not a single fact or date or number that`s been used to make this up that`s in any controversy. Isn`t there disagreement among scientists about whether the problem is real or not? Actually, not really. Meet people that aren`t really real. ROY SPENCER, PHD, FORMER SENIOR CLIMATE SCIENTIST, NASA: Politicians and some of the scientists like to say that there`s a consensus now on global warming or the science has been settled, but you have to ask them, what is there a consensus on? Because it really makes a difference. What are you talking about? The only consensus I`m aware of is that it`s warmed in the last century. They completely ignore the fact that there`s this thing called the Oregon petition that was signed by 19,000 professionals and scientists who don`t agree with the idea that we are causing climate change. JOHN CHRISTY, PHD, ALABAMA STATE CLIMATOLOGIST: One of the statements in the SPM was the statement that, if you boil it down, it says we are 90 percent certain that most of the warming in the last 50 years was due to human effects. I don`t agree with that. I think things are much more ambiguous
How about the so-called hockey stick graph. This is the version shown by Al Gore. However, the original version used by the IPCC contained a wide margin of error not shown in "An Inconvenient Truth." Inconvenient, huh? Critics say there`s even more missing. PATRICK MICHAELS, PHD, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA STATE CLIMATOLOGIST: There are two factors that most climatologists think happened that don`t seem to be included in it, which are the little Ice Age, which is a very cold period that ended in the late 19th century, and the medieval warm period, around 1000 or so. CHRIS HORNER, "POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO GLOBAL WARMING": Since the third U.N. report, for which this was the smoking gun, there`s been a fourth U.N. report. Does anybody see a hockey stick in there anywhere? I can`t see you. It`s not in there. Guess what? It`s air-brushed out, in classic fashion, and they don`t even mention why it`s not here. What hockey stick? I didn`t see any hockey stick.
What about that really cool animation of Florida and Manhattan drowning? Huh, cool, huh? You`ve seen these horrific scenarios everywhere based purely on catastrophic hypotheticals that dramatically exaggerate even what the U.N. says. It`s Al Gore`s best supporting actor, the word "if." GORE: If we have an increase of five degrees, if Greenland broke up and melted...... if this were to go, sea level worldwide would go up 20 feet. MARIO LEWIS, PHD, GOVERNMENT POLICY ANALYST: Where he`s misleading is that he gives the impression that this is something that is likely to happen. The likelihood of this is next to nil. DAVID LEGATES, PHD, CLIMATOLOGIST, UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE: The IPCC report is that the upper limit of sea level rise by the year 2100 is going to be about 23 inches. Al Gore makes up 20 feet. The truth isn`t scary. The bottom line is, no one is denying that the globe has warmed. It has, 0.74 degrees Celsius.But there`s a disagreement on why, and there`s even more disagreement on if it will be catastrophic or not. The tactics Al Gore uses in "An Inconvenient Truth" deserve an Oscar. We all have to remember: There`s a difference between science and science fiction.
A "New York Times" story reported that 84 percent of Americans now see human activity as at least contributing to warming. What they didn`t put in that same story is that 75 percent of those think that it is just one factor of many. Another survey from a New York-based educational provider shows kids are now more scared of global warming than terrorism, cancer and car crashes. The organization that took the survey said one of the main reasons was the media coverage of tragedies, like the tsunami. The tsunami was caused by an earthquake. And as far as is known, even Al Gore isn`t claiming a link between global warming and earthquakes. I think to solve these problems, we need to take a step back. Isn`t it amazing that fossil fuels have become the enemy? The rise in our CO-2 emissions have coincided with the rise in our wealth, our life expectancy, and technological advancement. Fossil fuels are, in some ways, a victim of their own success. They`ve helped us in so many ways: We`ve stopped worrying about whether we can heat our homes or get sick people to the hospital. Instead, we now focus on developing new kinds of energy simply to avoid the possibility of future environmental problems. When you think about the history of the Earth, that`s a pretty good problem to have, isn`t it? Now, that doesn`t mean that we don`t want clean air. No one wants the Earth to die. But it`s what we do about it that`s at question. The correct decisions will not be made when fueled by frantic alarmism. Kids are now being shown "An Inconvenient Truth" completely unchallenged, not just in science class, but in art and math classes. A green hotel in California has just replaced the traditional in-room Bible with an in-room copy of "An Inconvenient Truth." Al Gore`s version of climate change has no longer become science. It`s dogma. And if you question it, you are a heretic. For now, all we can do is look for sober solutions in a world drunk on hysteria. The debate is not over. I have a feeling it`s just beginning.
more on climate
Hi Kes,
I’d like to begin where you left off. The Will Ferrell piece is quite funny but it is this continual cross pollination of topics that prevents reasoned out debates that would actually help people make better decisions. When I (and others) think this is just a huge political football, it is because politics is always thrown in for extra measure—the clear message being that if we get rid of the Republicans in the U.S. all our problems will be over.
When you and I find scientific evidence to back up our point of view doesn’t it seem to you that even the scientists disagree. So who is right and who is wrong?
There are a couple of points on CO2 and solar output. Go to CO2 science.com to get a more complete picture of what is actually happening.
Terry Ball is not at the centre of a huge media counter attack. In fact, he is a retired Canadian climatologist, living in a leaky apartment, driving a 1992 vehicle and trying to use his knowledge and that of others to show people that we should not be watching Al Gores movie and swallowing it hook line and sinker.
If you dug a little deeper into the information provided in that movie you would determine that the predictions and data they are using is based on ‘computer models’.
I am paraphrasing here but;
Computer models have been wrong on every single 'prediction' to date and they leave out two of the major solar factors that cause climate change. They do not include negative feedack, they do not cope with particulates in the atmosphere and they barely include clouds at all - this include the latest research by Svensmark. NASA got the official temperature record wrong. This agency is under the direction of James Hanse, ardent Gore supporter. Ironically, the error makes all the staetments in Gore's movie about temperatures of the last few decades incorrect. Now we learn that four of the warmest four years in the record were in the 1930s before humans began producing much CO2. We learned 1998 was not the warmest year, it was 1934. These changes change the slope of the temperature curve so that the claim of 0.6°C increase over the last 130 years is wrong and well within natural variability contary to the claims it wasn't. These were the only pieces of evidence of a human signal. Apart from anything else the ice core and other records show that temperature changes before CO2, not as is assumed and as built into the computer models.
I know this is a little more of the ‘he said she said’ kind of rhetoric that doesn’t add much to the real questions but since you mentioned them as a source of information:
Desmogblog is a web site paid for by a Canadian who pleaded gullty to massive fraud. It was set up by James Hoggan who is Chair of the David Suzuki Foundation. Hoggan also has a publicity company and the Suzuki Foundation is one of his clients along with Ballard Fuel, wind turbine companies and others that stand to profit from the 'go green' philosophy. The Foundation also receives money from three oil companies but somehow that is acceptable because it doesn't have an agenda.
The claim in Dessmogblog that Terry Ball is paid by the energy companies is false and when he helped set up Friends of Science (FOS) he warned them about the slur campaigns that would occur. They put the money they received in a blind trust run by the University of Calgary.
When David Anderson said he had consulted Canadian climate experts on Kyoto, eight Canadian climate experts including Terry Ball went to Ottawa and held a press conference saying we were not consulted. Terry Balls expenses of about $800 were paid by Friends of Science. It subsequently turned out that a very small percent, about 2%, of FOS money came from an oil company. From this Desmogblog argued that since a small percentage of the expenses came from an oil company that he was paid by the oil companies to spout their line.
No spin here eh?
As for Kyoto…
True 160 countries signed the original agreement but most were not required to meet any reductions including China and India. Can you name any countries that met their Kyoto commitments? . The truth is if every country met its requirements the reduction would be so small no scientist in the world would be able to detect the difference. Why? Because CO2 is less than 4% of the Greenhouse Gases and the human generated portion a minute fraction of that.
Ironically, the US using George Bush's voluntary program achieved a greater reduction in the growth of their CO2 production than any other developed nation.
The entire Kyoto thing is political and was made so by Maurice Strong (board member of the Suzuki Foundation) and his formation of the IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Their rules require the scientific report be written, then a Summary for Policymakers is produced by politicians. This is then released to the public but also goes back to the scientists to make sure the technical report fits with the political conclusions. India sent a single delegate.
Its true about information. Its amazing what’s out there when you done a little research and there’s lots for both sides of any question.
This is a good discussion and I think that in many respects we’re not that far apart because we both understand that polluting is bad and if each of us takes personal responsibility to do our small part it can make a huge difference.
I don’t know however how emerging economies especially like those in India and China can be made to buy in when they’re just getting an appetite for a consumer based society. Its difficult enough here where we figure that we have access to all this information that can help us make better decisions.
I recently heard a UBC professor(can’t remember his name) who has just completed a significant study that looked at the human ability to make better decisions based on more information.
His findings basically were that better educated people do not show any better ability to make better decisions. I thought this was pretty radical coming from a professor. He said better educated people tend to make more money and spend that money on more of the products that we claim are ruining the planet ie big suvs, living spaces much bigger than required and then filling them with all kinds of ‘stuff’.
In my eyes this is a form of ‘elitism’ and I really don’t like that concept which basically anoints a privileged few while telling everyone else they should follow a different set of rules. If you want to learn about the extreme condition that develops when this sort of thing is out of control, study the rise and fall of communism in Russia.
Signing off for now,
Love,
Dad
P.S.
I actually had a copy of Inconvenient Truth in hand and was going to buy it so that I would have that information on a first hand basis. I opted for not spending the 30 bucks but I will rent it sometime.
I did more research that continues to debunk a lot of what is said and i was going to send that to you but I won't unless you are interested in reading it or add it to the blog.
A lot of people are debating this issue and I especially reespect and enjoy the fact that we can be part of that conversation.
I’d like to begin where you left off. The Will Ferrell piece is quite funny but it is this continual cross pollination of topics that prevents reasoned out debates that would actually help people make better decisions. When I (and others) think this is just a huge political football, it is because politics is always thrown in for extra measure—the clear message being that if we get rid of the Republicans in the U.S. all our problems will be over.
When you and I find scientific evidence to back up our point of view doesn’t it seem to you that even the scientists disagree. So who is right and who is wrong?
There are a couple of points on CO2 and solar output. Go to CO2 science.com to get a more complete picture of what is actually happening.
Terry Ball is not at the centre of a huge media counter attack. In fact, he is a retired Canadian climatologist, living in a leaky apartment, driving a 1992 vehicle and trying to use his knowledge and that of others to show people that we should not be watching Al Gores movie and swallowing it hook line and sinker.
If you dug a little deeper into the information provided in that movie you would determine that the predictions and data they are using is based on ‘computer models’.
I am paraphrasing here but;
Computer models have been wrong on every single 'prediction' to date and they leave out two of the major solar factors that cause climate change. They do not include negative feedack, they do not cope with particulates in the atmosphere and they barely include clouds at all - this include the latest research by Svensmark. NASA got the official temperature record wrong. This agency is under the direction of James Hanse, ardent Gore supporter. Ironically, the error makes all the staetments in Gore's movie about temperatures of the last few decades incorrect. Now we learn that four of the warmest four years in the record were in the 1930s before humans began producing much CO2. We learned 1998 was not the warmest year, it was 1934. These changes change the slope of the temperature curve so that the claim of 0.6°C increase over the last 130 years is wrong and well within natural variability contary to the claims it wasn't. These were the only pieces of evidence of a human signal. Apart from anything else the ice core and other records show that temperature changes before CO2, not as is assumed and as built into the computer models.
I know this is a little more of the ‘he said she said’ kind of rhetoric that doesn’t add much to the real questions but since you mentioned them as a source of information:
Desmogblog is a web site paid for by a Canadian who pleaded gullty to massive fraud. It was set up by James Hoggan who is Chair of the David Suzuki Foundation. Hoggan also has a publicity company and the Suzuki Foundation is one of his clients along with Ballard Fuel, wind turbine companies and others that stand to profit from the 'go green' philosophy. The Foundation also receives money from three oil companies but somehow that is acceptable because it doesn't have an agenda.
The claim in Dessmogblog that Terry Ball is paid by the energy companies is false and when he helped set up Friends of Science (FOS) he warned them about the slur campaigns that would occur. They put the money they received in a blind trust run by the University of Calgary.
When David Anderson said he had consulted Canadian climate experts on Kyoto, eight Canadian climate experts including Terry Ball went to Ottawa and held a press conference saying we were not consulted. Terry Balls expenses of about $800 were paid by Friends of Science. It subsequently turned out that a very small percent, about 2%, of FOS money came from an oil company. From this Desmogblog argued that since a small percentage of the expenses came from an oil company that he was paid by the oil companies to spout their line.
No spin here eh?
As for Kyoto…
True 160 countries signed the original agreement but most were not required to meet any reductions including China and India. Can you name any countries that met their Kyoto commitments? . The truth is if every country met its requirements the reduction would be so small no scientist in the world would be able to detect the difference. Why? Because CO2 is less than 4% of the Greenhouse Gases and the human generated portion a minute fraction of that.
Ironically, the US using George Bush's voluntary program achieved a greater reduction in the growth of their CO2 production than any other developed nation.
The entire Kyoto thing is political and was made so by Maurice Strong (board member of the Suzuki Foundation) and his formation of the IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Their rules require the scientific report be written, then a Summary for Policymakers is produced by politicians. This is then released to the public but also goes back to the scientists to make sure the technical report fits with the political conclusions. India sent a single delegate.
Its true about information. Its amazing what’s out there when you done a little research and there’s lots for both sides of any question.
This is a good discussion and I think that in many respects we’re not that far apart because we both understand that polluting is bad and if each of us takes personal responsibility to do our small part it can make a huge difference.
I don’t know however how emerging economies especially like those in India and China can be made to buy in when they’re just getting an appetite for a consumer based society. Its difficult enough here where we figure that we have access to all this information that can help us make better decisions.
I recently heard a UBC professor(can’t remember his name) who has just completed a significant study that looked at the human ability to make better decisions based on more information.
His findings basically were that better educated people do not show any better ability to make better decisions. I thought this was pretty radical coming from a professor. He said better educated people tend to make more money and spend that money on more of the products that we claim are ruining the planet ie big suvs, living spaces much bigger than required and then filling them with all kinds of ‘stuff’.
In my eyes this is a form of ‘elitism’ and I really don’t like that concept which basically anoints a privileged few while telling everyone else they should follow a different set of rules. If you want to learn about the extreme condition that develops when this sort of thing is out of control, study the rise and fall of communism in Russia.
Signing off for now,
Love,
Dad
P.S.
I actually had a copy of Inconvenient Truth in hand and was going to buy it so that I would have that information on a first hand basis. I opted for not spending the 30 bucks but I will rent it sometime.
I did more research that continues to debunk a lot of what is said and i was going to send that to you but I won't unless you are interested in reading it or add it to the blog.
A lot of people are debating this issue and I especially reespect and enjoy the fact that we can be part of that conversation.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Kes responds
Thanks for the reply.
I would like to point out a few more things to you though.
"I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern."
Once again I would like to point out his organization is making radio commercials saying it's ok to pollute (they claim C02 isn't harmeful). Do you not find this even a little bit irrisponsible? Especially for an organization claiming to want to better our enviroment?
"I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc."
Here is some great information on the sun and it's solar output: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
"While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues."
I found it interesting that a lot of reports that point out increased solar activity as a likely cause for global warming show data that ends in 1980. Why? Because after 1980 there was a decline in sunspots on the surface of the sun and a decline in solar output.
More information here:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4CF1-4202-1508-820283414B7F0000http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm
In regards to other planets one must take into account all planets and moons in the solar system not simply point out a few planets and one moon that could possibly be warming. I think it's important to point out that we know far less about the geological makeup of the other planets in our solar system then we do our own.
More information can be found here:
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn11642http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070404-mars-warming.html
"These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?"
I disagree, the vast majority of our wealth is in the hands of a few. It's not a few that are going to make a change it's the masses. It is the consumer is the one who ultimately holds the power with there buying dollars. Why are the major north american car makers in deep trouble? Because they failed to see the growing demand for more efficient less polluting vehicles where as the Japanese manufactures did. The irony of this is one of the main reasons the Japanese automakers put so much effort into cleaner vehicles and new hybrid technologies is due to some of the strict laws that were passed in California. I would like to recommend watching a move called "Who killed the electric car".
"Just because the herd is following doesn't’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off."
Once again I disagree. :) Back in the 1400's people didn't go to school, you were burned at the stake if you didn't believe in what the church said and the internet and other forms of modern communication did not exist. I think that we have progressed considerably in our views on sharing information and making informed decisions based on the most accurate information we have at our disposal.
"Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true."
I was waiting for this. :) Al Gore... Have you seen his movie? Do you know anything about his story? I think you should at least view his movie before making claims against his cause. The only other thing I will say about this is no matter what his motivation he seems to at least have some concern with what is happening on our planet and the gross over consumption that is going on in the US; which is more then can be said about most politicians. His movie isn't about spreading fear, if you've seen it you should know that. He is trying to educate people or at least bring up the subject of global warming to people who otherwise might think twice about it. Right or wrong at least he is making people aware and asking questions; the first step in solving any kind of problem. Even if he is set to make some money off this wouldn't it be nice to see some GREEN companies making some coin other then all the oil companies? Aren't we tired of throwing $20 bills out our window as we drive down the road?
"Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?"
I am aware of the theory on animals being a contributor to green house gasses. A few interesting stats on cattle in the US:
Fifty percent of the wetlands, 90% of the northwestern old-growth forests, and 99% of the tall-grass prairie have been destroyed in the last 200 years.
Eighty percent of the corn grown and 95% of the oats are fed to livestock.
Fifty-six percent of available farmland is used for beef production.
Kind of scary isn't it? The forests and wetlands that act as C02 sinks and remove carbon from our atmosphere are being destroyed for more farting cattle.. Maybe we should be eating less fast food?
You are correct, a huge cosmic event did wipe the slate clean so to speak and create the vast amount carbon based resources we have in the ground. The big thing here is that these resources took millions of years to develop and we are now using them up as fast as we can find them. So lets just say it takes 3 million years to produce x amount of carbon resources through natural processes and we then release these same carbon resources back into the atmosphere in 1,000 years isn't pretty easy to conclude it might have some adverse effects?
Also I think you might be missing my point on population. Never before in the history of our planet have the inhabitants created pollution outside the natural processes with the exception of man. So if cattle can have an effect on our environment isn't it reasonable to then think that human waste and pollution will as well?
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
A few hundred scientist? 160 countries have ratified Kyoto, I would think that each of the governments in these countries have more then a few scientist studying climate change and have be providing their governments with information. We are talking about some of the smartest science institutes in the world! NASA? They put men on the moon and have developed the vast majority of the technology that has allowed us to even begin to understand the effects we have on our planet and what is happening around our solar system. How can we just simply disregard something as someone out to make a quick buck when so many different countries and people of all religions, ages and ethnic backgrounds seem to think something is so important. On top of all that the facts are there, cold hard data that show some very scary trends on how we are impacting the plant.
Isn't it better to error on the side of caution when it's our planets future that could be at stake?
I will leave you with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxpEqln5EdQ
Love,Kes
I would like to point out a few more things to you though.
"I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern."
Once again I would like to point out his organization is making radio commercials saying it's ok to pollute (they claim C02 isn't harmeful). Do you not find this even a little bit irrisponsible? Especially for an organization claiming to want to better our enviroment?
"I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc."
Here is some great information on the sun and it's solar output: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
"While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues."
I found it interesting that a lot of reports that point out increased solar activity as a likely cause for global warming show data that ends in 1980. Why? Because after 1980 there was a decline in sunspots on the surface of the sun and a decline in solar output.
More information here:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4CF1-4202-1508-820283414B7F0000http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm
In regards to other planets one must take into account all planets and moons in the solar system not simply point out a few planets and one moon that could possibly be warming. I think it's important to point out that we know far less about the geological makeup of the other planets in our solar system then we do our own.
More information can be found here:
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn11642http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070404-mars-warming.html
"These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?"
I disagree, the vast majority of our wealth is in the hands of a few. It's not a few that are going to make a change it's the masses. It is the consumer is the one who ultimately holds the power with there buying dollars. Why are the major north american car makers in deep trouble? Because they failed to see the growing demand for more efficient less polluting vehicles where as the Japanese manufactures did. The irony of this is one of the main reasons the Japanese automakers put so much effort into cleaner vehicles and new hybrid technologies is due to some of the strict laws that were passed in California. I would like to recommend watching a move called "Who killed the electric car".
"Just because the herd is following doesn't’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off."
Once again I disagree. :) Back in the 1400's people didn't go to school, you were burned at the stake if you didn't believe in what the church said and the internet and other forms of modern communication did not exist. I think that we have progressed considerably in our views on sharing information and making informed decisions based on the most accurate information we have at our disposal.
"Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true."
I was waiting for this. :) Al Gore... Have you seen his movie? Do you know anything about his story? I think you should at least view his movie before making claims against his cause. The only other thing I will say about this is no matter what his motivation he seems to at least have some concern with what is happening on our planet and the gross over consumption that is going on in the US; which is more then can be said about most politicians. His movie isn't about spreading fear, if you've seen it you should know that. He is trying to educate people or at least bring up the subject of global warming to people who otherwise might think twice about it. Right or wrong at least he is making people aware and asking questions; the first step in solving any kind of problem. Even if he is set to make some money off this wouldn't it be nice to see some GREEN companies making some coin other then all the oil companies? Aren't we tired of throwing $20 bills out our window as we drive down the road?
"Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?"
I am aware of the theory on animals being a contributor to green house gasses. A few interesting stats on cattle in the US:
Fifty percent of the wetlands, 90% of the northwestern old-growth forests, and 99% of the tall-grass prairie have been destroyed in the last 200 years.
Eighty percent of the corn grown and 95% of the oats are fed to livestock.
Fifty-six percent of available farmland is used for beef production.
Kind of scary isn't it? The forests and wetlands that act as C02 sinks and remove carbon from our atmosphere are being destroyed for more farting cattle.. Maybe we should be eating less fast food?
You are correct, a huge cosmic event did wipe the slate clean so to speak and create the vast amount carbon based resources we have in the ground. The big thing here is that these resources took millions of years to develop and we are now using them up as fast as we can find them. So lets just say it takes 3 million years to produce x amount of carbon resources through natural processes and we then release these same carbon resources back into the atmosphere in 1,000 years isn't pretty easy to conclude it might have some adverse effects?
Also I think you might be missing my point on population. Never before in the history of our planet have the inhabitants created pollution outside the natural processes with the exception of man. So if cattle can have an effect on our environment isn't it reasonable to then think that human waste and pollution will as well?
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
A few hundred scientist? 160 countries have ratified Kyoto, I would think that each of the governments in these countries have more then a few scientist studying climate change and have be providing their governments with information. We are talking about some of the smartest science institutes in the world! NASA? They put men on the moon and have developed the vast majority of the technology that has allowed us to even begin to understand the effects we have on our planet and what is happening around our solar system. How can we just simply disregard something as someone out to make a quick buck when so many different countries and people of all religions, ages and ethnic backgrounds seem to think something is so important. On top of all that the facts are there, cold hard data that show some very scary trends on how we are impacting the plant.
Isn't it better to error on the side of caution when it's our planets future that could be at stake?
I will leave you with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxpEqln5EdQ
Love,Kes
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
I sent Kes's opinions to Terry Ball
From: TIM BALL To: Glenn Allen Subject: Re: FW: RE: Climate ChangeDate: Mon, 03 Sep 2007 21:33:12 -0700This is such arrant nonsense I don't know where to begin. Maybe we can start with the obvious fact that the "thoughtful"young man didn't do his research anywhere near adequately. I would fail him if he submmitted this as a Grade X paper let alone a university one. If he listened to all the tapes, interviews, and documents on our web site he would see we provide answers and explanations with what is wrong with the 'official' position. If he read my complete research record starting with my PhD, which was written when the official and scientific consensus was the threat of global cooling he would have a better understanding of my knowledge of the subject. I defy him to show one single shred of evidence that human CO2 or CO2 at all is causing climate change. This would exclude computer model outputs. They are the only source of evidence for such claims, especially those used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Worse, they can't even forecast the weather 10 days from now let alone 50 years. These computer models have been wrong on every single 'prediction' to date, which isn't surprising. They leave out two of the major solar factors that cause climate change. They do not include negative feedack, they do not cope with particulates in the atmosphere and they barely include clouds at all - this include the latest research by Svensmark et al. The thoughtful young man lists NASA as a source but we have just learned how they got the official temperature record wrong. This agency is uner the direction of James Hanse, ardent Gore supprter. Ironically, the error (I personally think it was more than an error) makes all the statments in Gore's movie about temperatures of the last few decades incorrect. Now we learn that four of the warmest four years in the record were in the 1930s before humans began producing much CO2. We learned 1998 was not the warmest year, it was 1934. These changes change the slope of the temperature curve so that the claim of 0.6°C increase over the last 130 years is wrong and well within natural variability contary to the claims it wasn't. It's gone, the hockey sitck is gone and these were the only pieces of evidence of a human signal. Part from anything else the ice core and other records show that temperature changes before CO2 not as is assumed and as built into the computer models.
He should also look at his comments on CO2 and plants, which show a complete lack of understanding of the science. He should visit CO2 science.com to get a better idea of what is actually happening. He could also learn that his beloved government agencies such as NASA are saying the increased CO2 in the atmosphere has caused an expansion of global vegetation.
Of course, this won't happen because he, like so many others, become instant experts in climate and climate change when they would fail even the most basic climate science quiz.
He talks about Desmogblog a web site paid for by a Canadian who pleaded guillty to massive fraud. It was set up by James Hoggan who is Chair of the David Suzuki Fooundation. Hoggan also has a publicity company and the Suzuki Foundation is one of his clients along with Ballard Fuel, wind turbine companies and others that stand to profit from the 'go green' philosophy. The Foundation also receives money from three oil companies but somehow that is acceptable because it doesn't have an agenda.
The claim in Dessmogblog that I am paid by the energy companies is false. When I helped set up Friends of Science (FOS) I warned them about the slur campaigns that would occur. They put the money they received in a blind trust run by the University of Calgary. When David Anderson said he had consulted Canadian climate experts on Kyoto, eight of us went to Ottawa and held a press conference saying we were not conuslted. My expenses of about $800 were paid by Friends of Science. It subsequently turnd out that a very small percent, I believe it was about 2%, of FOS money came from an oil company. From this Desmogblog argued that since a small percentage of the expenses I received had, unbeknown to me, a percentage of that money then I was paid by the oil companies to spout their line. It is a bloody insult. If I was paid by them I woudn't be living on a pension, living in a leaky apartment block or driving a 1992 car.
The "thoughtul young man"should also do his homework on Kyoto. True 160 countries signed the original agreement but most were not requird to meet any reductions including China and India. He should also check on how many met their commitment or came even close. The truth is if every country met its requirements the reduction would be so small no scientist in the world would be able to detect the difference. Why? Because CO2 is less than 4% of the Greenhouse Gases and the human portion a minute fraction of that. Indeed, the entire human production is within theerror of the estimates of three of the major natural contributors to atmospheric CO2.
Ironically, the US using George Bush's voluntary program (the author and his son seem to detest with a passion that colours their judgment), achieved a greater reduction in the growth of their CO2 production than any developed nation.
The entire issue is political and was made so by Maurice Strong and his formation of the IPCC wose reports are ludicrous. Their rules require the scientific report be written, then a Summary for Policmakers is produced by politicans. This is then released to the public but also goes back othe scientists to make sure the technical report fits with the political conclusions. China fought desperately against what was going on to the point here they reduced the exremes so much that it ws noticed immediately by the media. India showed its disdain for the entire process by sending a single delegate.
The political nature of the science fits well with the clear political biases of the father and son. Mybe they could get one of their political friends to give me clear proff that human CO2 is causing global warming or climate change. I doubt it will happen because their searches are selective and limited by political blinkers, which they don't seem to realize they are wearing.
I am sick and tired of people who know nothing about the sceince claiming I have the science wrong because people who attacke me personally say i have it wrong. what they don't even realize is that bcause of heir lack of knowlegde or nderstanding they end up with a personal attack - but it is somehow acceptable becaause they have the right political perspective. What arrogant rubbish - like father like son. I could point out many more errors of facts and conclusions as el s more politcal bis, but they are not worth my time. I am simply doing this for you.
Tim Ball
He should also look at his comments on CO2 and plants, which show a complete lack of understanding of the science. He should visit CO2 science.com to get a better idea of what is actually happening. He could also learn that his beloved government agencies such as NASA are saying the increased CO2 in the atmosphere has caused an expansion of global vegetation.
Of course, this won't happen because he, like so many others, become instant experts in climate and climate change when they would fail even the most basic climate science quiz.
He talks about Desmogblog a web site paid for by a Canadian who pleaded guillty to massive fraud. It was set up by James Hoggan who is Chair of the David Suzuki Fooundation. Hoggan also has a publicity company and the Suzuki Foundation is one of his clients along with Ballard Fuel, wind turbine companies and others that stand to profit from the 'go green' philosophy. The Foundation also receives money from three oil companies but somehow that is acceptable because it doesn't have an agenda.
The claim in Dessmogblog that I am paid by the energy companies is false. When I helped set up Friends of Science (FOS) I warned them about the slur campaigns that would occur. They put the money they received in a blind trust run by the University of Calgary. When David Anderson said he had consulted Canadian climate experts on Kyoto, eight of us went to Ottawa and held a press conference saying we were not conuslted. My expenses of about $800 were paid by Friends of Science. It subsequently turnd out that a very small percent, I believe it was about 2%, of FOS money came from an oil company. From this Desmogblog argued that since a small percentage of the expenses I received had, unbeknown to me, a percentage of that money then I was paid by the oil companies to spout their line. It is a bloody insult. If I was paid by them I woudn't be living on a pension, living in a leaky apartment block or driving a 1992 car.
The "thoughtul young man"should also do his homework on Kyoto. True 160 countries signed the original agreement but most were not requird to meet any reductions including China and India. He should also check on how many met their commitment or came even close. The truth is if every country met its requirements the reduction would be so small no scientist in the world would be able to detect the difference. Why? Because CO2 is less than 4% of the Greenhouse Gases and the human portion a minute fraction of that. Indeed, the entire human production is within theerror of the estimates of three of the major natural contributors to atmospheric CO2.
Ironically, the US using George Bush's voluntary program (the author and his son seem to detest with a passion that colours their judgment), achieved a greater reduction in the growth of their CO2 production than any developed nation.
The entire issue is political and was made so by Maurice Strong and his formation of the IPCC wose reports are ludicrous. Their rules require the scientific report be written, then a Summary for Policmakers is produced by politicans. This is then released to the public but also goes back othe scientists to make sure the technical report fits with the political conclusions. China fought desperately against what was going on to the point here they reduced the exremes so much that it ws noticed immediately by the media. India showed its disdain for the entire process by sending a single delegate.
The political nature of the science fits well with the clear political biases of the father and son. Mybe they could get one of their political friends to give me clear proff that human CO2 is causing global warming or climate change. I doubt it will happen because their searches are selective and limited by political blinkers, which they don't seem to realize they are wearing.
I am sick and tired of people who know nothing about the sceince claiming I have the science wrong because people who attacke me personally say i have it wrong. what they don't even realize is that bcause of heir lack of knowlegde or nderstanding they end up with a personal attack - but it is somehow acceptable becaause they have the right political perspective. What arrogant rubbish - like father like son. I could point out many more errors of facts and conclusions as el s more politcal bis, but they are not worth my time. I am simply doing this for you.
Tim Ball
I replied to Kes
Hi Kes,
Obviously, there is more information out there than the one organization Terry Ball is associated with. Like you said we should look at information from both sides and draw our own opinion.
I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc.
I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern. He said and I agree that all of us need to be concerned about pollution and polluting and being proactive in reducing our consumption of hydro carbons. Nobody disputes that 15 percent of the worlds population controls and uses 85 percent of the worlds man produced wealth.
The difference in scientific opinion is that the main stream thinking follows the ‘people are to blame for global warming’ theory. A much smaller scientific community believes that there is a bigger universal picture that needs to be recognized in that regard.
These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?
Just because the herd is following doesn’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off.
Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true.
These are your words Kes and I couldn’t agree more with them.
“The key to finding unbiased information is finding the facts and creating your own opinion. In this case real scientific data not some group scientist who's hands are in the back pocket of the industries at blame and over eager to start pointing fingers. Actually look at both sides of the story and decide from there.”
When you talk about the population levels and their effect on climate, I would use the vast amount of hydrocarbon reserves in the ground, oil, gas, coal etc.as pretty strong evidence that it took a pretty massive amount of population of some kind to produce it. Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?
Personally I don’t have any problem with controlling our consumption. What each person does in their day to day lives can do a lot to reduce pollution and consumption. You’re right if you think that most people don’t give a rats butt or if they do its okay as long as it doesn’t affect the plans they have to buy this that and whatever so they can live the life they ‘deserve”.
The more people that buy into energy conservation, less consumption , less polluting the better it will be for all of us. But those emerging middle classes in India and China aren’t too worried. In our shrinking global village they are learning to be consumers and they’re not going to stop anytime soon.
There are historic examples that it is impossible to stop what and where humanity migrate to. Whether it’s the poor people of Europe coming by the millions to North America, Millions of Latin and South American migrating to the United States or the massive desire for a consumers society in India and China.
Its true these events cause radical changes.
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
I admit to not knowing too much about the specific goals of Kyoto and I probably should correct that. Typically broad political documents are hardly worth the paper they’re written on in terms of how closely the governments that sign them actually follow the directions that are outlined.
Lets compare our carbon footprints one of these days. Other than the fact our house is too big for us I think were not that different.
Thank you very much for the effort you made to respond. I really appreciated it. I always enjoy and respect the thoughtful opinions you have about the world around you.
Love,
Dad
Here is the research I came up with
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
RELATED
Climate Change Predictions Not Exaggerated, Analysis Says (February 1, 2007)
New Mars Pictures Show Signs of Watery "Aquifers" (February 16, 2007)
Photo Gallery: Global Warming
Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.
In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.
Solar Cycles
Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.
Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.
"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.
By studying fluctuations in the warmth of the sun, Abdussamatov believes he can see a pattern that fits with the ups and downs in climate we see on Earth and Mars.
All planets experience a few wobbles as they make their journey around the sun. Earth's wobbles are known as Milankovitch cycles and occur on time scales of between 20,000 and 100,000 years.
These fluctuations change the tilt of Earth's axis and its distance from the sun and are thought to be responsible for the waxing and waning of ice ages on Earth.
Mars and Earth wobble in different ways, and most scientists think it is pure coincidence that both planets are between ice ages right now.
"Mars has no [large] moon, which makes its wobbles much larger, and hence the swings in climate are greater too,"
Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.
He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's climate and virtually no influence on Mars.
But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any, life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin.
Most scientists now fear that the massive amount of carbon dioxide humans are pumping into the air will lead to a catastrophic rise in Earth's temperatures, dramatically raising sea levels as glaciers melt and leading to extreme weather worldwide.
Abdussamatov remains contrarian, however, suggesting that the sun holds something quite different in store.
"The solar irradiance began to drop in the 1990s, and a minimum will be reached by approximately 2040," Abdussamatov said. "It will cause a steep cooling of the climate on Earth in 15 to 20 years."
Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist at Liverpool John Moores University who monitors studies and news reports of asteroids, global warming and other potentially apocalyptic topics, recently quoted in his daily electronic newsletter the following from a blog called Strata-Sphere:
“Global warming on Neptune's moon Triton as well as Jupiter and Pluto, and now Mars has some [scientists] scratching their heads over what could possibly be in common with the warming of all these planets ... Could there be something in common with all the planets in our solar system that might cause them all to warm at the same time?”
Peiser included quotes from recent news articles that take up other aspects of the idea.
“I think it is an intriguing coincidence that warming trends have been observed on a number of very diverse planetary bodies in our solar system,” Peiser said in an email interview. “Perhaps this is just a fluke.”
In fact, scientists have alternative explanations for the anomalous warming on each of these other planetary bodies.
The warming on Triton, for example, could be the result of an extreme southern summer on the moon, a season that occurs every few hundred years, as well as possible changes in the makeup of surface ice that caused it to absorb more of the Sun’s heat.
Researchers credited Pluto’s warming to possible eruptive activity and a delayed thawing from its last close approach to the Sun in 1989.
And the recent storm activity on Jupiter is being blamed on a recurring climatic cycle that churns up material from the gas giant’s interior and lofts it to the surface, where it is heated by the Sun.
Sun does vary
The radiation output of the Sun does fluctuate over the course of its 11-year solar cycle. But the change is only about one-tenth of 1 percent—not substantial enough to affect Earth’s climate in dramatic ways, and certainly not enough to be the sole culprit of our planet’s current warming trend, scientists say.
“The small measured changes in solar output and variations from one decade to the next are only on the order of a fraction of a percent, and if you do the calculations not even large enough to really provide a detectable signal in the surface temperature record,” said Penn State meteorologist Michael Mann.
The link between solar activity and global warming is just another scapegoat for human-caused warming, Mann told LiveScience.
“Solar activity continues to be one of the last bastions of contrarians,” Mann said. “People who don’t accept the existence of anthropogenic climate change still try to point to solar activity.”
The Maunder Minimum
This is not to say that solar fluctuations never influence Earth’s climate in substantial ways. During a 75-year period beginning in 1645, astronomers detected almost no sunspot activity on the Sun. Called the “Maunder Minimum,” this event coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, a 350-year cold spell that gripped much of Europe and North America.
Recent studies have cast doubt on this relationship, however. New estimates of the total change in the brightness of the Sun during the Maunder Minimum suggest it was only fractions of a percent, and perhaps not enough to create the global cooling commonly attributed to it.
“The situation is pretty ambiguous,” said David Rind, a senior climate researcher at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who has modeled the Maunder Minimum.
Based on current estimates, even if another Maunder Minimum were to occur, it might result in an average temperature decrease of about 2 degrees Fahrenheit, Rind said.
This would still not be enough to counteract warming of between 2 to 12 degrees Fahrenheit from greenhouse gases by 2100, as predicted by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.
LiveScience staff writer Andrea Thompson contributed to this article.
Neptune is the planet farthest from the Sun (Pluto is now considered only a dwarf planet), Neptune is the planet farthest from the Earth, and to our knowledge, there has been absolutely no industrialization out at Neptune in recent centuries. There has been no recent build-up of greenhouse gases there, no deforestation, no rapid urbanization, no increase in contrails from jet airplanes, and no increase in ozone in the low atmosphere; recent changes at Neptune could never be blamed on any human influence. Incredibly, an article has appeared in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters showing a stunning relationship between the solar output, Neptune’s brightness, and heaven forbid, the temperature of the Earth. With its obvious implications to the greenhouse debate, we are certain you have never heard of the work and never will outside World Climate Report.
In case you have forgotten your basic science lessons on the planets, Neptune orbits the Sun at a distance 30 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun and Neptune revolves around the Sun once every 164.8 Earth years. Neptune has 17 times the mass of the Earth, its atmosphere is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium, with traces of methane that account for the planet’s distinctive blue appearance. It was the only planet discovered mathematically – scientists noted variations in the orbit of Uranus, they calculated the orbit and position of a yet undiscovered planet that could cause the variations noted for Uranus, they determined where the planet should be, and on the first night they searched for it (September 23, 1846), they discovered the large planet sitting within 1 degree of their predictions. The new planet was named for Neptune, Roman god of the sea, given its distinctive blue color. Observations from Earth and a 1989 Voyager 2 flyby have revealed that Neptune’s cloud tops are extremely cold (−346°F) being so far from the Sun while the center of the planet has a temperature of 13,000°F due to high pressure generating extremely hot gases.
In the recent article, Hammel and Lockwood, from the Space Science Institute in Colorado and the Lowell Observatory, note that measurements of visible light from Neptune have been taken at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona since 1950. Obviously, light from Neptune can be related to seasons on the planet, small variations in Neptune’s orbit, the apparent tilt of the axis as viewed from the Earth, the varying distance from Neptune to Earth, and of course, changes in the atmosphere near the Lowell Observatory. Astronomers are clever, they are fully aware of these complications, and they adjust the measurements accordingly.
As seen in Figure 1, Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. But with no one to blame, Hammel and Lockwood explored how variations in the output of the Sun might control variations in the brightness of Neptune.
Figure 1 (a) represents the corrected visible light from Neptune from 1950 to 2006; (b) shows the temperature anomalies of the Earth; (c) shows the total solar irradiance as a percent variation by year; (d) shows the ultraviolet emission from the Sun (Source: Hammel and Lockwood (2007)).
What would seem so simple statistically is complicated by the degrees of freedom in the various time series which is related to the serial correlation in the data (e.g., next year’s value is highly dependent on this year’s value). Nonetheless, they find that the correlation coefficient between solar irradiance and Neptune’s brightness is near 0.90 (1.00 is perfect). The same relationship is found between the Earth’s temperature anomalies and the solar output. Hammel and Lockwood note “In other words, the Earth temperature values are as well correlated with solar irradiance (r = 0.89) as they are with Neptune’s blue brightness (r > 0.90), assuming a 10-year lag of the Neptune values.” The temporal lag is needed to account for the large mass of Neptune that would require years to adjust to any changes in solar output.
Hammel and Lockwood conclude that “In summary, if Neptune’s atmosphere is indeed responding to some variation in solar activity in a manner similar to that of the Earth albeit with a temporal lag” then “Neptune may provide an independent (and extraterrestrial) locale for studies of solar effects on planetary atmospheres.”
World Climate Report has covered many articles in the scientific literature showing that variations in solar output, including variations within specific wavelengths (e.g., cosmic, ultraviolet, visible, infrared) are highly correlated with temperature variations near the Earth’s surface. Believe it or not, when the Sun is more energetic and putting out more energy, the Earth tends to warm up, and when the Sun cools down, so does the Earth. The Hammel and Lockwood article reveals that the same is true out at Neptune; when the Sun’s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up and get brighter given a decade lag.
If for some reason you do not believe that the Sun is a significant player in determining the temperature of the Earth (after all, we are told repeatedly that humans are causing most of the observed warming on the Earth), then asked yourself if you believe that Neptune’s temperature is controlled by the Sun. How is it possible that the Earth’s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well.
If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least.
Reference:
Hammel, H. B., and G. W. Lockwood, 2007. Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth’s temperature, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L08203, doi:10.1029/2006GL028764.
Other planets are warming up too.Well, the thing is that it is not only "Mars" and "Pluto" that are warming, but pretty much every planet, and moon with an atmosphere in the solar system is warming/undergoing climate change, and in most cases what is happening to every planet in the solar system, is worse than what is happening on Earth.
Global Warming on Pluto.http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_02100...
Climate change/warming on Jupiter.http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2006-05-04-jup...
Global warming on Triton. (Neptune's largest moon)http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980526052143data_trunc...
Global warming on Enceladus. (A moon of Saturn)http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20060419/Featu...
Climate change on Saturn.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6135450.stm...
Obviously, there is more information out there than the one organization Terry Ball is associated with. Like you said we should look at information from both sides and draw our own opinion.
I am sending you some other information regarding solar warming of other planets etc.
I never got from Timothy Ball that there is no need for concern. He said and I agree that all of us need to be concerned about pollution and polluting and being proactive in reducing our consumption of hydro carbons. Nobody disputes that 15 percent of the worlds population controls and uses 85 percent of the worlds man produced wealth.
The difference in scientific opinion is that the main stream thinking follows the ‘people are to blame for global warming’ theory. A much smaller scientific community believes that there is a bigger universal picture that needs to be recognized in that regard.
These should be two different arguments. What is causing Climate Change? And how should all of the rich people of the world be proactive in reducing the levels of pollution and polluting activities?
Just because the herd is following doesn’t mean it is necessarily right. Back in the 1400’s most of the civilized world thought the earth was flat and if you went past the horizon you’d just fall off.
Lobbying to have your data recognized is no more biased than having a multi million dollar organized movement headed by a high profile politician(Al Gore ) that makes a movie supporting only 1 point of view and then try to proliferate that point of view in ways such as trying to deliver it into the hands of the public school system for mass consumption as completely factual and true.
These are your words Kes and I couldn’t agree more with them.
“The key to finding unbiased information is finding the facts and creating your own opinion. In this case real scientific data not some group scientist who's hands are in the back pocket of the industries at blame and over eager to start pointing fingers. Actually look at both sides of the story and decide from there.”
When you talk about the population levels and their effect on climate, I would use the vast amount of hydrocarbon reserves in the ground, oil, gas, coal etc.as pretty strong evidence that it took a pretty massive amount of population of some kind to produce it. Even today its pretty common scientific knowledge that domesticated animals are one of the largest contributors to green house gasses on the planet. Did this planet become so overrun with giant animals that the earth shutdown in its ability to support them or did some humongous cosmic event occur that wiped them out and created this incredible energy supply in the ground?
Personally I don’t have any problem with controlling our consumption. What each person does in their day to day lives can do a lot to reduce pollution and consumption. You’re right if you think that most people don’t give a rats butt or if they do its okay as long as it doesn’t affect the plans they have to buy this that and whatever so they can live the life they ‘deserve”.
The more people that buy into energy conservation, less consumption , less polluting the better it will be for all of us. But those emerging middle classes in India and China aren’t too worried. In our shrinking global village they are learning to be consumers and they’re not going to stop anytime soon.
There are historic examples that it is impossible to stop what and where humanity migrate to. Whether it’s the poor people of Europe coming by the millions to North America, Millions of Latin and South American migrating to the United States or the massive desire for a consumers society in India and China.
Its true these events cause radical changes.
Its a radical point of view that after however many thousands or millions of years there has been life on this earth that we suddenly have a few hundred scientists who say we have 20 years to save the world. Its much more realistic to think they have a bigger political and economic agenda than a real concern to encourage the global community to be more thoughtful in its stewardship of the vast resources we have at our disposal on this planet we call home.
I admit to not knowing too much about the specific goals of Kyoto and I probably should correct that. Typically broad political documents are hardly worth the paper they’re written on in terms of how closely the governments that sign them actually follow the directions that are outlined.
Lets compare our carbon footprints one of these days. Other than the fact our house is too big for us I think were not that different.
Thank you very much for the effort you made to respond. I really appreciated it. I always enjoy and respect the thoughtful opinions you have about the world around you.
Love,
Dad
Here is the research I came up with
Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.
Earth is currently experiencing rapid warming, which the vast majority of climate scientists says is due to humans pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
RELATED
Climate Change Predictions Not Exaggerated, Analysis Says (February 1, 2007)
New Mars Pictures Show Signs of Watery "Aquifers" (February 16, 2007)
Photo Gallery: Global Warming
Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.
In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.
Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun.
"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," he said.
Solar Cycles
Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun's heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.
Mars and Earth, for instance, have experienced periodic ice ages throughout their histories.
"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.
By studying fluctuations in the warmth of the sun, Abdussamatov believes he can see a pattern that fits with the ups and downs in climate we see on Earth and Mars.
All planets experience a few wobbles as they make their journey around the sun. Earth's wobbles are known as Milankovitch cycles and occur on time scales of between 20,000 and 100,000 years.
These fluctuations change the tilt of Earth's axis and its distance from the sun and are thought to be responsible for the waxing and waning of ice ages on Earth.
Mars and Earth wobble in different ways, and most scientists think it is pure coincidence that both planets are between ice ages right now.
"Mars has no [large] moon, which makes its wobbles much larger, and hence the swings in climate are greater too,"
Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface.
He claims that carbon dioxide has only a small influence on Earth's climate and virtually no influence on Mars.
But "without the greenhouse effect there would be very little, if any, life on Earth, since our planet would pretty much be a big ball of ice," said Evan, of the University of Wisconsin.
Most scientists now fear that the massive amount of carbon dioxide humans are pumping into the air will lead to a catastrophic rise in Earth's temperatures, dramatically raising sea levels as glaciers melt and leading to extreme weather worldwide.
Abdussamatov remains contrarian, however, suggesting that the sun holds something quite different in store.
"The solar irradiance began to drop in the 1990s, and a minimum will be reached by approximately 2040," Abdussamatov said. "It will cause a steep cooling of the climate on Earth in 15 to 20 years."
Benny Peiser, a social anthropologist at Liverpool John Moores University who monitors studies and news reports of asteroids, global warming and other potentially apocalyptic topics, recently quoted in his daily electronic newsletter the following from a blog called Strata-Sphere:
“Global warming on Neptune's moon Triton as well as Jupiter and Pluto, and now Mars has some [scientists] scratching their heads over what could possibly be in common with the warming of all these planets ... Could there be something in common with all the planets in our solar system that might cause them all to warm at the same time?”
Peiser included quotes from recent news articles that take up other aspects of the idea.
“I think it is an intriguing coincidence that warming trends have been observed on a number of very diverse planetary bodies in our solar system,” Peiser said in an email interview. “Perhaps this is just a fluke.”
In fact, scientists have alternative explanations for the anomalous warming on each of these other planetary bodies.
The warming on Triton, for example, could be the result of an extreme southern summer on the moon, a season that occurs every few hundred years, as well as possible changes in the makeup of surface ice that caused it to absorb more of the Sun’s heat.
Researchers credited Pluto’s warming to possible eruptive activity and a delayed thawing from its last close approach to the Sun in 1989.
And the recent storm activity on Jupiter is being blamed on a recurring climatic cycle that churns up material from the gas giant’s interior and lofts it to the surface, where it is heated by the Sun.
Sun does vary
The radiation output of the Sun does fluctuate over the course of its 11-year solar cycle. But the change is only about one-tenth of 1 percent—not substantial enough to affect Earth’s climate in dramatic ways, and certainly not enough to be the sole culprit of our planet’s current warming trend, scientists say.
“The small measured changes in solar output and variations from one decade to the next are only on the order of a fraction of a percent, and if you do the calculations not even large enough to really provide a detectable signal in the surface temperature record,” said Penn State meteorologist Michael Mann.
The link between solar activity and global warming is just another scapegoat for human-caused warming, Mann told LiveScience.
“Solar activity continues to be one of the last bastions of contrarians,” Mann said. “People who don’t accept the existence of anthropogenic climate change still try to point to solar activity.”
The Maunder Minimum
This is not to say that solar fluctuations never influence Earth’s climate in substantial ways. During a 75-year period beginning in 1645, astronomers detected almost no sunspot activity on the Sun. Called the “Maunder Minimum,” this event coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, a 350-year cold spell that gripped much of Europe and North America.
Recent studies have cast doubt on this relationship, however. New estimates of the total change in the brightness of the Sun during the Maunder Minimum suggest it was only fractions of a percent, and perhaps not enough to create the global cooling commonly attributed to it.
“The situation is pretty ambiguous,” said David Rind, a senior climate researcher at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who has modeled the Maunder Minimum.
Based on current estimates, even if another Maunder Minimum were to occur, it might result in an average temperature decrease of about 2 degrees Fahrenheit, Rind said.
This would still not be enough to counteract warming of between 2 to 12 degrees Fahrenheit from greenhouse gases by 2100, as predicted by the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.
LiveScience staff writer Andrea Thompson contributed to this article.
Neptune is the planet farthest from the Sun (Pluto is now considered only a dwarf planet), Neptune is the planet farthest from the Earth, and to our knowledge, there has been absolutely no industrialization out at Neptune in recent centuries. There has been no recent build-up of greenhouse gases there, no deforestation, no rapid urbanization, no increase in contrails from jet airplanes, and no increase in ozone in the low atmosphere; recent changes at Neptune could never be blamed on any human influence. Incredibly, an article has appeared in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters showing a stunning relationship between the solar output, Neptune’s brightness, and heaven forbid, the temperature of the Earth. With its obvious implications to the greenhouse debate, we are certain you have never heard of the work and never will outside World Climate Report.
In case you have forgotten your basic science lessons on the planets, Neptune orbits the Sun at a distance 30 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun and Neptune revolves around the Sun once every 164.8 Earth years. Neptune has 17 times the mass of the Earth, its atmosphere is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium, with traces of methane that account for the planet’s distinctive blue appearance. It was the only planet discovered mathematically – scientists noted variations in the orbit of Uranus, they calculated the orbit and position of a yet undiscovered planet that could cause the variations noted for Uranus, they determined where the planet should be, and on the first night they searched for it (September 23, 1846), they discovered the large planet sitting within 1 degree of their predictions. The new planet was named for Neptune, Roman god of the sea, given its distinctive blue color. Observations from Earth and a 1989 Voyager 2 flyby have revealed that Neptune’s cloud tops are extremely cold (−346°F) being so far from the Sun while the center of the planet has a temperature of 13,000°F due to high pressure generating extremely hot gases.
In the recent article, Hammel and Lockwood, from the Space Science Institute in Colorado and the Lowell Observatory, note that measurements of visible light from Neptune have been taken at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona since 1950. Obviously, light from Neptune can be related to seasons on the planet, small variations in Neptune’s orbit, the apparent tilt of the axis as viewed from the Earth, the varying distance from Neptune to Earth, and of course, changes in the atmosphere near the Lowell Observatory. Astronomers are clever, they are fully aware of these complications, and they adjust the measurements accordingly.
As seen in Figure 1, Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. But with no one to blame, Hammel and Lockwood explored how variations in the output of the Sun might control variations in the brightness of Neptune.
Figure 1 (a) represents the corrected visible light from Neptune from 1950 to 2006; (b) shows the temperature anomalies of the Earth; (c) shows the total solar irradiance as a percent variation by year; (d) shows the ultraviolet emission from the Sun (Source: Hammel and Lockwood (2007)).
What would seem so simple statistically is complicated by the degrees of freedom in the various time series which is related to the serial correlation in the data (e.g., next year’s value is highly dependent on this year’s value). Nonetheless, they find that the correlation coefficient between solar irradiance and Neptune’s brightness is near 0.90 (1.00 is perfect). The same relationship is found between the Earth’s temperature anomalies and the solar output. Hammel and Lockwood note “In other words, the Earth temperature values are as well correlated with solar irradiance (r = 0.89) as they are with Neptune’s blue brightness (r > 0.90), assuming a 10-year lag of the Neptune values.” The temporal lag is needed to account for the large mass of Neptune that would require years to adjust to any changes in solar output.
Hammel and Lockwood conclude that “In summary, if Neptune’s atmosphere is indeed responding to some variation in solar activity in a manner similar to that of the Earth albeit with a temporal lag” then “Neptune may provide an independent (and extraterrestrial) locale for studies of solar effects on planetary atmospheres.”
World Climate Report has covered many articles in the scientific literature showing that variations in solar output, including variations within specific wavelengths (e.g., cosmic, ultraviolet, visible, infrared) are highly correlated with temperature variations near the Earth’s surface. Believe it or not, when the Sun is more energetic and putting out more energy, the Earth tends to warm up, and when the Sun cools down, so does the Earth. The Hammel and Lockwood article reveals that the same is true out at Neptune; when the Sun’s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up and get brighter given a decade lag.
If for some reason you do not believe that the Sun is a significant player in determining the temperature of the Earth (after all, we are told repeatedly that humans are causing most of the observed warming on the Earth), then asked yourself if you believe that Neptune’s temperature is controlled by the Sun. How is it possible that the Earth’s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well.
If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least.
Reference:
Hammel, H. B., and G. W. Lockwood, 2007. Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth’s temperature, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L08203, doi:10.1029/2006GL028764.
Other planets are warming up too.Well, the thing is that it is not only "Mars" and "Pluto" that are warming, but pretty much every planet, and moon with an atmosphere in the solar system is warming/undergoing climate change, and in most cases what is happening to every planet in the solar system, is worse than what is happening on Earth.
Global Warming on Pluto.http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pluto_warming_02100...
Climate change/warming on Jupiter.http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2006-05-04-jup...
Global warming on Triton. (Neptune's largest moon)http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980526052143data_trunc...
Global warming on Enceladus. (A moon of Saturn)http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/articles/20060419/Featu...
Climate change on Saturn.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6135450.stm...
The Great(Grate) Climate Change Debate
The debate is raging world wide. A spark of it ignited at our house Sept 30 when family got together to celebrate the first 40 year old sibling. The day after I sent a link to Kes. The information there goes against the common theme getting all the publicity these days that the production of CO2 by human activity is the major cause of temperature change on the planet and we are running out of time to change catastophic consequences.
The link to Terry Ball is at the bottom of the page. I had heard him recently on a T.V. show. His common sense talk made a lot of sense to me and I located his website and wrote him an e-mail in support.
The preceeding comments are Kes's reply.
Thanks for the link. I read through the website and was unimpressed, they don't present any information on what they think is happening with climate change. There whole view seems to be that it's a natural process and there is no need for concern, but fail to present any solid data supporting there claims.
I dug a ittle deeper and read some of Timothy Balls articles not posted on his website; once again he just points fingers at people trying to cause a so called "fear" and fails to present any real data on what he feels is happening. For someone who has a doctorate in climatology it would be nice if he spent a little less time writing about how all the other scientist are wrong and would start doing some of his own research. On top of all that he was on Fox news, definitely the worlds most reliable source of unbiased and accurate information...
Also it looks like the founder of NRSP (Timothy Egan) coincidentally a lobbyist who happens to have clients of the likes of the Canadian Electricity Association and the Canadian Gas Association. Both of these organizations represent the industries that do most of our polluting and generate the vast majority of C02 in Canada. I found it hilarious there claim that the more C02 the better!?! What?!? Sure maybe plants in very controlled environments have benefited from increased levels of C02 but they failed to mention that plant growth is also linked to a few other more important elements - sunlight, water, temperature etc.. not strictly C02. Smoking is good for us too right? Come on this defies common sense!
Read this: http://www.desmogblog.com/nrsp-controlled-by-energy-lobbyists
The key to finding unbiased information is finding the facts and creating your own opinion. In this case real scientific data not some group scientist who's hands are in the back pocket of the industries at blame and over eager to start pointing fingers. Actually look at both sides of the story and decide from there.
For me it boils down to this. When you think the population of our planet has gone from around 3 billion people in the 1960's to over 6.5 billion present day how can you not think we've had some kind of drastic effect on our planet. Parts of the world (India & China) with some of the highest population density have an increased growing middle class and are starting to modernize at increased rates. If everyone lived like we do in North America we would need 6 planet earths to sustain our current rate of consumption.. Ill let you draw your own conclusions from that.
How can anyone sit down look at the data on C02 emissions into our atmosphere and say that we haven't had anything to do with it? It's completely insane to think that if you cut down the planets forests and start using up all the fossil fuel reserves (stored sources of carbon from dead animal and plant life) that you are not having an impact on C02 emissions. Sure maybe we account for only 20% (now) but what happens in 20 years?? what happens if it only takes 5% to tip the balance? Is it better to be ignorant about it and say it's ok it's ok and not really know? Or is it better to think that even if there is the slightest possibility we have an impact that maybe we should change our ways? There is a lot of information out there that shows earth temperature is directly tied to C02 levels in our atmosphere. C02 emissions are a the highest levels in possibly 26 million years, and as crazy as it may seem the increase started somewhere around the start of industrialization. Coincidence? Maybe. Cause for concern I should think so.
I could go on and on but I won't, the information is out there. I find if funny that people get all bent out of shape at the idea of a carbon tax or a tax to those who choose to abuse the environment when America spends over a billion dollars a day to fight a war over oil. Maybe George will yet find those WMD's and we can all pat him on the back. Isn't it odd that 160 counties in the world have ratified Kyoto realizing there is a problem and are trying figure out what is exactly happening? They are working together to find ways to solve it and once again it's the finger pointing we are right you are wrong style attitude coming from the US and for now our own government it seems. When will people learn.I will leave you with a few links that are more factual in nature:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html
http://eobglossary.gsfc.nasa.gov/Library/GlobalWarmingUpdate/global_warming_update.html
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook.html
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/Resources/pointers/glob_warm.html
http://biophile.co.za/climate-change/global-warming-fact-and-fiction/
Kes
From: "Glenn Allen"To: keswicka@hotmail.com, y2kdragon@hotmail.com, cathy@tvfacts.org, hjranch@telus.netSubject: Climate ChangeDate: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 17:56:11 -0700
Hi,
Great conversation aways happens when we have a little get together. Like the climate change topic which Kes, Scott, Dave, Howard and I had a lively time tossing around for awhile
This is the website for Timothy Ball, the guy I heard on T.V. a while ago and was referring to.
Thought I'd pass it along fyi.
Great seeing everybody and thanks so much for coming over. We really appreciate it.
http://www.nrsp.com/strategy.html
The link to Terry Ball is at the bottom of the page. I had heard him recently on a T.V. show. His common sense talk made a lot of sense to me and I located his website and wrote him an e-mail in support.
The preceeding comments are Kes's reply.
Thanks for the link. I read through the website and was unimpressed, they don't present any information on what they think is happening with climate change. There whole view seems to be that it's a natural process and there is no need for concern, but fail to present any solid data supporting there claims.
I dug a ittle deeper and read some of Timothy Balls articles not posted on his website; once again he just points fingers at people trying to cause a so called "fear" and fails to present any real data on what he feels is happening. For someone who has a doctorate in climatology it would be nice if he spent a little less time writing about how all the other scientist are wrong and would start doing some of his own research. On top of all that he was on Fox news, definitely the worlds most reliable source of unbiased and accurate information...
Also it looks like the founder of NRSP (Timothy Egan) coincidentally a lobbyist who happens to have clients of the likes of the Canadian Electricity Association and the Canadian Gas Association. Both of these organizations represent the industries that do most of our polluting and generate the vast majority of C02 in Canada. I found it hilarious there claim that the more C02 the better!?! What?!? Sure maybe plants in very controlled environments have benefited from increased levels of C02 but they failed to mention that plant growth is also linked to a few other more important elements - sunlight, water, temperature etc.. not strictly C02. Smoking is good for us too right? Come on this defies common sense!
Read this: http://www.desmogblog.com/nrsp-controlled-by-energy-lobbyists
The key to finding unbiased information is finding the facts and creating your own opinion. In this case real scientific data not some group scientist who's hands are in the back pocket of the industries at blame and over eager to start pointing fingers. Actually look at both sides of the story and decide from there.
For me it boils down to this. When you think the population of our planet has gone from around 3 billion people in the 1960's to over 6.5 billion present day how can you not think we've had some kind of drastic effect on our planet. Parts of the world (India & China) with some of the highest population density have an increased growing middle class and are starting to modernize at increased rates. If everyone lived like we do in North America we would need 6 planet earths to sustain our current rate of consumption.. Ill let you draw your own conclusions from that.
How can anyone sit down look at the data on C02 emissions into our atmosphere and say that we haven't had anything to do with it? It's completely insane to think that if you cut down the planets forests and start using up all the fossil fuel reserves (stored sources of carbon from dead animal and plant life) that you are not having an impact on C02 emissions. Sure maybe we account for only 20% (now) but what happens in 20 years?? what happens if it only takes 5% to tip the balance? Is it better to be ignorant about it and say it's ok it's ok and not really know? Or is it better to think that even if there is the slightest possibility we have an impact that maybe we should change our ways? There is a lot of information out there that shows earth temperature is directly tied to C02 levels in our atmosphere. C02 emissions are a the highest levels in possibly 26 million years, and as crazy as it may seem the increase started somewhere around the start of industrialization. Coincidence? Maybe. Cause for concern I should think so.
I could go on and on but I won't, the information is out there. I find if funny that people get all bent out of shape at the idea of a carbon tax or a tax to those who choose to abuse the environment when America spends over a billion dollars a day to fight a war over oil. Maybe George will yet find those WMD's and we can all pat him on the back. Isn't it odd that 160 counties in the world have ratified Kyoto realizing there is a problem and are trying figure out what is exactly happening? They are working together to find ways to solve it and once again it's the finger pointing we are right you are wrong style attitude coming from the US and for now our own government it seems. When will people learn.I will leave you with a few links that are more factual in nature:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/worldpopinfo.html
http://eobglossary.gsfc.nasa.gov/Library/GlobalWarmingUpdate/global_warming_update.html
http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_warming_worldbook.html
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/Resources/pointers/glob_warm.html
http://biophile.co.za/climate-change/global-warming-fact-and-fiction/
Kes
From: "Glenn Allen"
Hi,
Great conversation aways happens when we have a little get together. Like the climate change topic which Kes, Scott, Dave, Howard and I had a lively time tossing around for awhile
This is the website for Timothy Ball, the guy I heard on T.V. a while ago and was referring to.
Thought I'd pass it along fyi.
Great seeing everybody and thanks so much for coming over. We really appreciate it.
http://www.nrsp.com/strategy.html
Sunday, September 02, 2007
The Myth of a Christian Nation
The Myth of a Christian Nation by Gregory A. Boyd
Excerpts and thoughts…
P. 135
If we loved as Jesus loved we would become humble servants of humanity.
If we offer unconditional love, worth and acceptance that can’t be found any where else, we would become known as people who do not judge, who make no claim for themselves but who simply live to serve others.
People will want to hang out with us just as they did Jesus.
“If we would simply internalize Jesus’ teaching that we are to consider our own sin to be tree trunks in our eyes and other people’s sin – whatever it is – to be a mere dust particle, we would quickly become known not as self righteous judgers” (as is too often the case when we say we are “Christians) “but as the most humble, self-effacing people on the planet.”
“If you want to judge someone you have to be sinless. Of course, if you are sinless, like Jesus, you won’t have any inclination to do so.”
P. 27
“Any peace achieved by violence is a peace forever threatened by violence, thus ensuring that the bloody game will be perpetuated.
Followers of Jesus must realize – and must help others realize ….the hope of the world lies in a kingdom that is not of this world, a kingdom that doesn’t participate in tit for tat, a kingdom that operates with a completely different understanding of power. It is the kingdom established by Jesus Christ and a kingdom that is expanded by people committed to following him. It is the kingdom of God…it is a kingdom where greatness is defined by serving and sacrificing for others.”
I have had my beliefs in the roots of democratic government (mainly North American) changed by reading Gregory Boyd’s viewpoint.
I had always reasoned that democratic law was rooted in biblical law and that is why we enjoy the security and freedom we do in North America. The erosion of those laws I saw as fueling the downfall of our society. Thus I favored actions that defend our laws. I assimilated the sacrifices that both my parents made in WWII with the need to fight against those who seek to destroy the freedom that comes with democracy.
Mr. Boyd clearly defined that the way of the sword is an historical and ongoing abuse of assuming that we are fulfilling God’s commission when we use violence.
If we do not look like Jesus then we are not fulfilling his commission.
Excerpts and thoughts…
P. 135
If we loved as Jesus loved we would become humble servants of humanity.
If we offer unconditional love, worth and acceptance that can’t be found any where else, we would become known as people who do not judge, who make no claim for themselves but who simply live to serve others.
People will want to hang out with us just as they did Jesus.
“If we would simply internalize Jesus’ teaching that we are to consider our own sin to be tree trunks in our eyes and other people’s sin – whatever it is – to be a mere dust particle, we would quickly become known not as self righteous judgers” (as is too often the case when we say we are “Christians) “but as the most humble, self-effacing people on the planet.”
“If you want to judge someone you have to be sinless. Of course, if you are sinless, like Jesus, you won’t have any inclination to do so.”
P. 27
“Any peace achieved by violence is a peace forever threatened by violence, thus ensuring that the bloody game will be perpetuated.
Followers of Jesus must realize – and must help others realize ….the hope of the world lies in a kingdom that is not of this world, a kingdom that doesn’t participate in tit for tat, a kingdom that operates with a completely different understanding of power. It is the kingdom established by Jesus Christ and a kingdom that is expanded by people committed to following him. It is the kingdom of God…it is a kingdom where greatness is defined by serving and sacrificing for others.”
I have had my beliefs in the roots of democratic government (mainly North American) changed by reading Gregory Boyd’s viewpoint.
I had always reasoned that democratic law was rooted in biblical law and that is why we enjoy the security and freedom we do in North America. The erosion of those laws I saw as fueling the downfall of our society. Thus I favored actions that defend our laws. I assimilated the sacrifices that both my parents made in WWII with the need to fight against those who seek to destroy the freedom that comes with democracy.
Mr. Boyd clearly defined that the way of the sword is an historical and ongoing abuse of assuming that we are fulfilling God’s commission when we use violence.
If we do not look like Jesus then we are not fulfilling his commission.
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Salute To Dad
Whenever I go back to Prince Rupert I like to make a point of visiting my Dad.
His spirit has remained part of me since September 12 1982. But I still like to visit the veterans section of the Prince Rupert Cemetery. I usually clean away the encroaching moss from the small rectangular granite grave stone that bears his name, military information and the quotation, A Proud Canadian.
This summer I decided to ask someone to join me. My cousin, Carroll, was always like another son to my Dad. It was Carroll who took on the unenviable task to call me when Dad died suddenly and unexpectedly. He and I have carried on that spiritual connection we seem to have even though our lives have often go in different directions.
Now Dad was a proud Canadian who served overseas for 5 years but there is an underlying significance to this tribute. There is a Canadian Whiskey called Royal Reserve and on the back of each 26 ounce bottle was a removeable sticker the read A Proud Canadian. There were a number of these stuck on various things and places around my parents house.
So when I asked Carroll if he would be interested in visiting Dads place where his earthly remains lie, I already had in hand a bottle of Royal Reserve and a couple of Cokes. So we drove up to the Cemetery one afternoon. We had a ‘snort’ as Dad would have called it straight from the bottle. Then dumped some of the Coke to make room for the other liquid. We stood with Dad and talked about the good times we remembered with him, his sense of humor, how we remembered his life, his never complain attitude even though the last 12 years were diminished somewhat from the effects of a heart attack that shortened his life to 63 years.
His was a simple and sometimes difficult life, yet surely not forgotten by many who knew him. Not perfect by any means. A teeshirt given to Carroll by a close friend had these words, which I think fit my Dad as well: I’m not for everyone, but those who like me like me a lot.
It probably explains why Carroll and my Dad were so close.
We poured some of our drinks around the grave stone in a loving and sharing way that a lot of people might not understand. Mighty irreverent by some standards. But no true Christian is perfect and in that time Carroll and I spent with Dad that afternoon we discovered something pretty amazing ….that each of us in his own private way yet in a real and meaningful way know that we will be together again some day.
It’s the best news I could have ever prayed to have.
Whenever I go back to Prince Rupert I like to make a point of visiting my Dad.
His spirit has remained part of me since September 12 1982. But I still like to visit the veterans section of the Prince Rupert Cemetery. I usually clean away the encroaching moss from the small rectangular granite grave stone that bears his name, military information and the quotation, A Proud Canadian.
This summer I decided to ask someone to join me. My cousin, Carroll, was always like another son to my Dad. It was Carroll who took on the unenviable task to call me when Dad died suddenly and unexpectedly. He and I have carried on that spiritual connection we seem to have even though our lives have often go in different directions.
Now Dad was a proud Canadian who served overseas for 5 years but there is an underlying significance to this tribute. There is a Canadian Whiskey called Royal Reserve and on the back of each 26 ounce bottle was a removeable sticker the read A Proud Canadian. There were a number of these stuck on various things and places around my parents house.
So when I asked Carroll if he would be interested in visiting Dads place where his earthly remains lie, I already had in hand a bottle of Royal Reserve and a couple of Cokes. So we drove up to the Cemetery one afternoon. We had a ‘snort’ as Dad would have called it straight from the bottle. Then dumped some of the Coke to make room for the other liquid. We stood with Dad and talked about the good times we remembered with him, his sense of humor, how we remembered his life, his never complain attitude even though the last 12 years were diminished somewhat from the effects of a heart attack that shortened his life to 63 years.
His was a simple and sometimes difficult life, yet surely not forgotten by many who knew him. Not perfect by any means. A teeshirt given to Carroll by a close friend had these words, which I think fit my Dad as well: I’m not for everyone, but those who like me like me a lot.
It probably explains why Carroll and my Dad were so close.
We poured some of our drinks around the grave stone in a loving and sharing way that a lot of people might not understand. Mighty irreverent by some standards. But no true Christian is perfect and in that time Carroll and I spent with Dad that afternoon we discovered something pretty amazing ….that each of us in his own private way yet in a real and meaningful way know that we will be together again some day.
It’s the best news I could have ever prayed to have.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Ten Dollars a Month
Before I was 6 years old I had crossed Canada twice.
Not alone of course, so did my parents and brother and sister.
And when we resettled in the Allen family home in 1953, in Sable River, I was old enough to start school. Actually I was only 5 and a half.
School was a one room white building next door to Thelma Harlow’s grocery store.
Grades 1 to 3 went in the morning. Grades 4 to 6 went in the afternoon.
It was a mile walk from where we lived. I remember walking most of the time.
In Grade two my sister joined the trek and in Grade 3 there were three of us.
It’s funny what you remember.
I remember breaking off a dried fern stalk in the ditch and using a piece of it to imitate smoking a cigarette as I walked to school. The dried fern stalk was porous so you could suck air through it and on a frosty morning, inhale and exhale and make it appear as if smoke was being exhaled…it was what most adults did so it seemed natural to practice.
I don’t know what acts of maturity I demonstrated that made me a candidate for the work at the school that actually paid money. But in Grade 5 I received a letter which I think I still have in some papers my Mom gave me a number of years ago. The letter stated that I had been hired to build the fires ( in the stove in the middle of the school house floor), sweep the floors, and fill the water coolers. This work would be done in the morning before classes and I would be paid $10.00 per month.
My parents scrapped to raise their family which expanded by one more when I was 7. The job provided me with spending money. I bought my first new bike out of the catalogue. I would have to make up any other specific details on expenditures but I’m sure it helped out the overall situation although I was never asked to put any of what I earned into the family budget.
I remember feeling grown-up to be trusted with these responsibilities. I enjoyed being in the school when no other kids were present. Feeling the heat off the fire I built warm the classroom, smelling the pine smelling dust retardant that I spread around the floors before sweeping, taking the first drinks of water out of the cooler with a throw away cone shaped cup and leaving before anyone arrived some how made me feel special and I was always sure to do a good job so as not to get any negative comments from the teachers.
Friendly Mrs. Quinlan taught the morning Grades and the stern Mrs. Freeman (who taught my Dad) taught the afternoon Grades. In grade 7, I began taking the bus 12 miles to Lockeport so my early morning walks and bike rides between home and the school were soon shoved to the past.
Years later, I was shown a picture of the old school being moved down the highway through Sable. Someone had bought it and turned it into a home on a piece of land they’d bought.Sometimes, I wonder if there is still someone building fires in a wood heater and sweeping the hardwood floors of the building that provided me with my first steady paycheck. If my grades throughout the rest of my school years were as good as those I achieved at the Sable River West one room school I most certainly would have become famous for something.
Not alone of course, so did my parents and brother and sister.
And when we resettled in the Allen family home in 1953, in Sable River, I was old enough to start school. Actually I was only 5 and a half.
School was a one room white building next door to Thelma Harlow’s grocery store.
Grades 1 to 3 went in the morning. Grades 4 to 6 went in the afternoon.
It was a mile walk from where we lived. I remember walking most of the time.
In Grade two my sister joined the trek and in Grade 3 there were three of us.
It’s funny what you remember.
I remember breaking off a dried fern stalk in the ditch and using a piece of it to imitate smoking a cigarette as I walked to school. The dried fern stalk was porous so you could suck air through it and on a frosty morning, inhale and exhale and make it appear as if smoke was being exhaled…it was what most adults did so it seemed natural to practice.
I don’t know what acts of maturity I demonstrated that made me a candidate for the work at the school that actually paid money. But in Grade 5 I received a letter which I think I still have in some papers my Mom gave me a number of years ago. The letter stated that I had been hired to build the fires ( in the stove in the middle of the school house floor), sweep the floors, and fill the water coolers. This work would be done in the morning before classes and I would be paid $10.00 per month.
My parents scrapped to raise their family which expanded by one more when I was 7. The job provided me with spending money. I bought my first new bike out of the catalogue. I would have to make up any other specific details on expenditures but I’m sure it helped out the overall situation although I was never asked to put any of what I earned into the family budget.
I remember feeling grown-up to be trusted with these responsibilities. I enjoyed being in the school when no other kids were present. Feeling the heat off the fire I built warm the classroom, smelling the pine smelling dust retardant that I spread around the floors before sweeping, taking the first drinks of water out of the cooler with a throw away cone shaped cup and leaving before anyone arrived some how made me feel special and I was always sure to do a good job so as not to get any negative comments from the teachers.
Friendly Mrs. Quinlan taught the morning Grades and the stern Mrs. Freeman (who taught my Dad) taught the afternoon Grades. In grade 7, I began taking the bus 12 miles to Lockeport so my early morning walks and bike rides between home and the school were soon shoved to the past.
Years later, I was shown a picture of the old school being moved down the highway through Sable. Someone had bought it and turned it into a home on a piece of land they’d bought.Sometimes, I wonder if there is still someone building fires in a wood heater and sweeping the hardwood floors of the building that provided me with my first steady paycheck. If my grades throughout the rest of my school years were as good as those I achieved at the Sable River West one room school I most certainly would have become famous for something.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
SNAPS AND SABLE RIVER WEST
When my Dad, Clifford, left Sable River West in Nova Scotia to find a
new life in British Columbia logging in the legendary Douglas Fir forests, I was two
years old, my sister was one and my younger brother was three months. Mom followed
him a few months later on the train with her young flock..
Three years and several short stays later in a variety of logging camps and small
Kootenay communities, we were back in Nova Scotia.
*****************
We ‘made’ Liverpool in the darkness of a late September evening. Our mud- caked 1949 Ford pickup looked like a horseless-covered wagon. Dad had stretched an old, brown tarpaulin over a bulging load of boxes, trunks and furniture. We’d squished into the cab in assorted arrangements for the 5000-mile journey.
Liverpool,where my Mom's sister Dora live was about 30 miles short of Sable River, our final destination. They hugged and cried happy tears in the front yard of the yellow bungalow with its ivy-covered veranda. Two large maples shed mitten-sized orange and red leaves over the reunion. Uncle Pete, a short man with an accent, shepherded us into their home where their two sons and a daughter eyed us shyly as we did them.
Uncle Pete and Aunt Dora insisted we stay the night. But Dad was ‘antsy’. It was his mother and father whom we were going to live with on the ‘home place’ in Sable.
So they negotiated a compromise.
“Whatdaya think Bub?” Dad tousled my head. “You and I best go up to Sable and see if it’s on the same spot in the road.”
A little while later, as the truck whined up a steep grade, Dad looked at me with that little lopsided grin. It was the one I always saw when he felt good about what he was doing. “Port La Bear (that’s what I heard then but I learned later seeing it on a map that it's Port Le Hebert) hill . . . won’t be long now.”
As we plowed through the night on furrows of yellow from the headlights of our faithful truck, I suddenly felt enormously grown up. The cab was so roomy and I got to sit beside the window!
Dad had grown up here. He knew this country like the back of his hand and he’d say, “If you go back far enough probably everybody’s related one way or another.” He always told stories about ‘ back home’. Many names of places and people were already familiar to me even though I didn’t know who or where they were.
After a few more miles we rumbled over a wooden bridge. “Tom Tigney River.” Dad explained. “Park Harlow’s mill is just up there a ways.” He nodded his head to the right. “He gave me my first job in the bush skidding smoke wood with his team of oxen. Some folks around here don’t like him . . . think he’s a mean bugger. Guess he can be. Always treated me fair.”
Dad pointed to a whitish blob on the left as the headlights shine bounced off a set of gas pumps. “ This here’s Bernard Dexter’s garage.”
We bumped onto the decking of another bridge. “ Well, Sable River, son. Our place goes right down to the river. Good swimming hole there and a nice little beach with red sand. Wait’ll you see it.”
The highway swung left. Dad pointed off to the right. “If we went straight up there, that’s the Nine Mile Road…. Your Grandad has a woodlot up there. Been in the family since I was knee high to a grass hopper.” We bounced over a railway crossing. Dad pointed out Thelma Harlow’s general store and the school house right beside it.
“Thelma’s married to Park Harlow’s son, Tom.” Dad always liked to tie everybody together. “That’s the school where you’ll be going. Same one I went to. You might even get the same teacher. Far as I know, Grace Freeman is still teaching. You better mind her. She doesn’t take guff from anyone. I learned from personal experience. ” Dad’s voiced quivered with emotion.
“Home sweet home with the fire black out.” He muttered.
The truck slowed . We turned left into a narrow, bush- lined driveway. In a few moments I saw a big barn in the bobbing headlights. We swung right. The side of a white shiplap, two- story house with a high, sharp sloped roof hovered before us.
Dad looked at his watch against the dim yellow of the dashboard lights. “Nearly eleven. No lights on. I guess Mother and Dad gave up waiting. It’s way past their bedtime. They were expecting us tonight but they don’t have a telephone so I couldn’t get a message unless I ‘d got hold of the neighbors.”
Suddenly a glow the color of butter smeared a couple of small windows.
“A light’s on Dad.” I exclaimed.
“Huh.” Dad gave a knowing little grunt. “Your Grandad goes to bed early but sleeps with one eye and an ear open.”
A door opened. More yellow oozed out of the house. A hunched figure raised an arm as a visor to peer into the headlights. Dad shut them off, switched off the engine and we both climbed out, closing the doors with a good slam which they needed to close properly.
It sounded like blasts from a double-barrelled shotgun in the crisp fall air. I followed Dad as he grabbed the man’s hand in a firm grip and held it.
“Got a little late for us to stay up and wait.” The man explained. “Sounded like a strange vehicle when the tires hit the gravel in the driveway. Good to have you back son.”
He peered toward me. “Now, who’s this you got with you?”
“This is number one son.” Dad brought me forward with his hand on my shoulder. “Glenn, this is your Grandad.”
“Sure looking all grown up now Churchill. Just a tyke three years ago.” He caught my hand in a firm grip. “ How ‘bout we get inside Glenn? Cold enough for frost on the rhubarb tonight.”
Dad moved spryly as another silhouette appeared in the doorway. They hugged and
exchanged tender sounding words.
“Well, well, well.” The words flowed smooth as molasses on a hot soda biscuit. “Have you got a hug for your Grammie, Glenn?”
I walked forward and was gently drawn into the warm bosom and the husky yet soft arms.
“Let’s get inside. You must be freezing out here.”
“No, I’m fine.” I replied.
“Well, you’re sure tougher than me young man.” She said.
With that she had her arm around my shoulder and headed us into the house. Just to the right as we entered, was the glistening black top of a kitchen stove with a white enamel warmer running along the back of it. I recognized the acrid aroma of freshly lit kindling and newspaper.
“It’s not too late for a snack is it? You men have had a long trip.” Grammie looked at me with a twinkle then over to Dad whose moment of hesitation was taken as an okay. “ Where’s the rest of the family?” Grammie asked as she shuffled toward a cupboard beside the stove.
“They’re at Pete and Doras’’. I’ll go get them tomorrow.” Dad explained.
“I’ve got water on Churchill. I knew that was Dad’s middle name but I’d never heard anyone call him that. “You know we still don’t use coffee but I have tea or Postum.”
“Tea’ll be fine, Mother.” Dad replied.
She returned from the cupboard carrying a round, well-worn cookie tin with pictures of castles on its side and top. “I just made these this afternoon.” Deft fingers removed the lid.
“Ginger snaps!” My Dads eager voice sang out as his hand glided past my head toward the open tin.
“Ah. Ah.” Grammie warned him off and pulled the tin back. “Glenn gets first pick.” She moved
the tin to where I could reach it.
The fragrance of ginger and molasses wafted from the container. It was filled with brown rectangular cookies. Each had precise parallel lines in groups of four, running diagonally along them. I wrapped my hand around one.
“Oh, that’s not enough for a growing boy.” Grammie urged.
I lifted out two more. She smiled her approval as I nibbled at the corner of one. They were hard and crunchy. The taste instantly made my mouth water. Dad grabbed a handful and stuck about half of one in his mouth. The sharp, hard corners bulged his cheeks. Grandad slipped one from the can protesting quietly that he shouldn’t have one because it was too late for him and cookies might keep him awake.
The gingery flavored dough had been rolled thin so when baked they became hard and snapped exactly on grooves in the dough. Grammie’s snaps were pretty much identical. The decorative lines perfectly repeated on each cookie.
While the kettle heated, Grammie went out to the small porch we’d entered through and returned with a gallon glass jar half full of milk. She had to tip it back and forth several times to mix in the thick cream that had separated. “A glass of nice cold milk is just what you need Glenn, to wash down those snaps. Soak them in the milk if you want to soften them up a bit. That’s what we do around here anyways.”
“Sure feels good to be home.” My Dad said. His lopsided grin was wider than usual.
***************
The taste of ginger snaps and milk. Grammie’s caring smile and warm voice. The feel from the place that had been called ‘home’ for several generations of my family tree have remained gentle breezes through my mind. I’ve always felt them as my ship of life sailed far from those times and places. And now they push persistently against a spinnaker of silent hope that would guide the voyage that way again.
When my Dad, Clifford, left Sable River West in Nova Scotia to find a
new life in British Columbia logging in the legendary Douglas Fir forests, I was two
years old, my sister was one and my younger brother was three months. Mom followed
him a few months later on the train with her young flock..
Three years and several short stays later in a variety of logging camps and small
Kootenay communities, we were back in Nova Scotia.
*****************
We ‘made’ Liverpool in the darkness of a late September evening. Our mud- caked 1949 Ford pickup looked like a horseless-covered wagon. Dad had stretched an old, brown tarpaulin over a bulging load of boxes, trunks and furniture. We’d squished into the cab in assorted arrangements for the 5000-mile journey.
Liverpool,where my Mom's sister Dora live was about 30 miles short of Sable River, our final destination. They hugged and cried happy tears in the front yard of the yellow bungalow with its ivy-covered veranda. Two large maples shed mitten-sized orange and red leaves over the reunion. Uncle Pete, a short man with an accent, shepherded us into their home where their two sons and a daughter eyed us shyly as we did them.
Uncle Pete and Aunt Dora insisted we stay the night. But Dad was ‘antsy’. It was his mother and father whom we were going to live with on the ‘home place’ in Sable.
So they negotiated a compromise.
“Whatdaya think Bub?” Dad tousled my head. “You and I best go up to Sable and see if it’s on the same spot in the road.”
A little while later, as the truck whined up a steep grade, Dad looked at me with that little lopsided grin. It was the one I always saw when he felt good about what he was doing. “Port La Bear (that’s what I heard then but I learned later seeing it on a map that it's Port Le Hebert) hill . . . won’t be long now.”
As we plowed through the night on furrows of yellow from the headlights of our faithful truck, I suddenly felt enormously grown up. The cab was so roomy and I got to sit beside the window!
Dad had grown up here. He knew this country like the back of his hand and he’d say, “If you go back far enough probably everybody’s related one way or another.” He always told stories about ‘ back home’. Many names of places and people were already familiar to me even though I didn’t know who or where they were.
After a few more miles we rumbled over a wooden bridge. “Tom Tigney River.” Dad explained. “Park Harlow’s mill is just up there a ways.” He nodded his head to the right. “He gave me my first job in the bush skidding smoke wood with his team of oxen. Some folks around here don’t like him . . . think he’s a mean bugger. Guess he can be. Always treated me fair.”
Dad pointed to a whitish blob on the left as the headlights shine bounced off a set of gas pumps. “ This here’s Bernard Dexter’s garage.”
We bumped onto the decking of another bridge. “ Well, Sable River, son. Our place goes right down to the river. Good swimming hole there and a nice little beach with red sand. Wait’ll you see it.”
The highway swung left. Dad pointed off to the right. “If we went straight up there, that’s the Nine Mile Road…. Your Grandad has a woodlot up there. Been in the family since I was knee high to a grass hopper.” We bounced over a railway crossing. Dad pointed out Thelma Harlow’s general store and the school house right beside it.
“Thelma’s married to Park Harlow’s son, Tom.” Dad always liked to tie everybody together. “That’s the school where you’ll be going. Same one I went to. You might even get the same teacher. Far as I know, Grace Freeman is still teaching. You better mind her. She doesn’t take guff from anyone. I learned from personal experience. ” Dad’s voiced quivered with emotion.
“Home sweet home with the fire black out.” He muttered.
The truck slowed . We turned left into a narrow, bush- lined driveway. In a few moments I saw a big barn in the bobbing headlights. We swung right. The side of a white shiplap, two- story house with a high, sharp sloped roof hovered before us.
Dad looked at his watch against the dim yellow of the dashboard lights. “Nearly eleven. No lights on. I guess Mother and Dad gave up waiting. It’s way past their bedtime. They were expecting us tonight but they don’t have a telephone so I couldn’t get a message unless I ‘d got hold of the neighbors.”
Suddenly a glow the color of butter smeared a couple of small windows.
“A light’s on Dad.” I exclaimed.
“Huh.” Dad gave a knowing little grunt. “Your Grandad goes to bed early but sleeps with one eye and an ear open.”
A door opened. More yellow oozed out of the house. A hunched figure raised an arm as a visor to peer into the headlights. Dad shut them off, switched off the engine and we both climbed out, closing the doors with a good slam which they needed to close properly.
It sounded like blasts from a double-barrelled shotgun in the crisp fall air. I followed Dad as he grabbed the man’s hand in a firm grip and held it.
“Got a little late for us to stay up and wait.” The man explained. “Sounded like a strange vehicle when the tires hit the gravel in the driveway. Good to have you back son.”
He peered toward me. “Now, who’s this you got with you?”
“This is number one son.” Dad brought me forward with his hand on my shoulder. “Glenn, this is your Grandad.”
“Sure looking all grown up now Churchill. Just a tyke three years ago.” He caught my hand in a firm grip. “ How ‘bout we get inside Glenn? Cold enough for frost on the rhubarb tonight.”
Dad moved spryly as another silhouette appeared in the doorway. They hugged and
exchanged tender sounding words.
“Well, well, well.” The words flowed smooth as molasses on a hot soda biscuit. “Have you got a hug for your Grammie, Glenn?”
I walked forward and was gently drawn into the warm bosom and the husky yet soft arms.
“Let’s get inside. You must be freezing out here.”
“No, I’m fine.” I replied.
“Well, you’re sure tougher than me young man.” She said.
With that she had her arm around my shoulder and headed us into the house. Just to the right as we entered, was the glistening black top of a kitchen stove with a white enamel warmer running along the back of it. I recognized the acrid aroma of freshly lit kindling and newspaper.
“It’s not too late for a snack is it? You men have had a long trip.” Grammie looked at me with a twinkle then over to Dad whose moment of hesitation was taken as an okay. “ Where’s the rest of the family?” Grammie asked as she shuffled toward a cupboard beside the stove.
“They’re at Pete and Doras’’. I’ll go get them tomorrow.” Dad explained.
“I’ve got water on Churchill. I knew that was Dad’s middle name but I’d never heard anyone call him that. “You know we still don’t use coffee but I have tea or Postum.”
“Tea’ll be fine, Mother.” Dad replied.
She returned from the cupboard carrying a round, well-worn cookie tin with pictures of castles on its side and top. “I just made these this afternoon.” Deft fingers removed the lid.
“Ginger snaps!” My Dads eager voice sang out as his hand glided past my head toward the open tin.
“Ah. Ah.” Grammie warned him off and pulled the tin back. “Glenn gets first pick.” She moved
the tin to where I could reach it.
The fragrance of ginger and molasses wafted from the container. It was filled with brown rectangular cookies. Each had precise parallel lines in groups of four, running diagonally along them. I wrapped my hand around one.
“Oh, that’s not enough for a growing boy.” Grammie urged.
I lifted out two more. She smiled her approval as I nibbled at the corner of one. They were hard and crunchy. The taste instantly made my mouth water. Dad grabbed a handful and stuck about half of one in his mouth. The sharp, hard corners bulged his cheeks. Grandad slipped one from the can protesting quietly that he shouldn’t have one because it was too late for him and cookies might keep him awake.
The gingery flavored dough had been rolled thin so when baked they became hard and snapped exactly on grooves in the dough. Grammie’s snaps were pretty much identical. The decorative lines perfectly repeated on each cookie.
While the kettle heated, Grammie went out to the small porch we’d entered through and returned with a gallon glass jar half full of milk. She had to tip it back and forth several times to mix in the thick cream that had separated. “A glass of nice cold milk is just what you need Glenn, to wash down those snaps. Soak them in the milk if you want to soften them up a bit. That’s what we do around here anyways.”
“Sure feels good to be home.” My Dad said. His lopsided grin was wider than usual.
***************
The taste of ginger snaps and milk. Grammie’s caring smile and warm voice. The feel from the place that had been called ‘home’ for several generations of my family tree have remained gentle breezes through my mind. I’ve always felt them as my ship of life sailed far from those times and places. And now they push persistently against a spinnaker of silent hope that would guide the voyage that way again.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Sport talk radio has created a public forum for the sports fanatic. Now it is possible to see inside some crazy weird minds. As Vancouver joins in the annual ritual of NHL playoffs, fans vent their opinions. Man there are some serious dudes out there! Just rippin’ whoever is not meeting their expectations. Of course they are egged on in many ways by the sports talk hosts who enjoy fanning the flames of both sides of every controversy because that’s what they need to create some sizzle.
I know this because I’m an egg in this basket and have been most of my life.
This spring I got challenged by a buddy of mine who cheers for the Canucks. This means win or lose, play bad, play great. Me being a more ‘knowledgeable fan’ was not always so happy with the play and results of the home team. But as the inevitability of the Canucks making the play-offs became apparent my buddy showed up one day with this old Canuck playoff flag and a story about them going to the finals every 12 years. Kiss the flag and maybe we’ll let you on the band wagon, he prods.
The photo tells the story. At first I was so busy biting my tongue I’m lucky to still have one left. But as the rollercoaster ride unfolded I discovered a whole fan life. Never lose hope, never criticize(a few carefully worded constructive comments…maybe).
This has not been as easy as it sounds…letting a 3-1 lead slip away…top players not scoring, blown out in game 1 against the Ducks. But game 2 locked me in. Missing half their top 4 defense and 2 other top forwards, inserting rookies to fill the holes this Canuck team just plain gutted it out and in double overtime Cowan the Brabarian finds a sliver of daylight to get the puck behind Giguere.
It was probably the first game I had honestly just sat there and cheered the team (only one or two tongue bites)and it felt unbelievably great! I know now that I can do this the rest of the way no matter the outcome and still have a feel good feeling for the home team when its all over.
I think I’m a reborn Canadian hockey fan with a new perspective on living and breathing hockey. Kissing the flag has changed me forever....at least for this season.
I know this because I’m an egg in this basket and have been most of my life.
This spring I got challenged by a buddy of mine who cheers for the Canucks. This means win or lose, play bad, play great. Me being a more ‘knowledgeable fan’ was not always so happy with the play and results of the home team. But as the inevitability of the Canucks making the play-offs became apparent my buddy showed up one day with this old Canuck playoff flag and a story about them going to the finals every 12 years. Kiss the flag and maybe we’ll let you on the band wagon, he prods.
The photo tells the story. At first I was so busy biting my tongue I’m lucky to still have one left. But as the rollercoaster ride unfolded I discovered a whole fan life. Never lose hope, never criticize(a few carefully worded constructive comments…maybe).
This has not been as easy as it sounds…letting a 3-1 lead slip away…top players not scoring, blown out in game 1 against the Ducks. But game 2 locked me in. Missing half their top 4 defense and 2 other top forwards, inserting rookies to fill the holes this Canuck team just plain gutted it out and in double overtime Cowan the Brabarian finds a sliver of daylight to get the puck behind Giguere.
It was probably the first game I had honestly just sat there and cheered the team (only one or two tongue bites)and it felt unbelievably great! I know now that I can do this the rest of the way no matter the outcome and still have a feel good feeling for the home team when its all over.
I think I’m a reborn Canadian hockey fan with a new perspective on living and breathing hockey. Kissing the flag has changed me forever....at least for this season.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Wind Me Up Baby!!
When Val took this picture I was sitting at the kitchen table with my laptop listening to rock music. The son of a friend had just released a new cd with his band. So I had an advance release that I loaded into my computer. This is not typical listening music for us 'older' rockers. So I had pulled on a headset over my hat so as not to disturb others while I checked it out.
I felt so 'cool' listening to the music under the hat but this picture shows me as looking like some weird older guy. Oh well, Wind Me Up Baby is still a very good song even if it doesn't make me look younger.
The Rock Tower
Val and I like to garage sale. This is a garage sale story.
This steel structure followed me home mostly because no one at the garage sale knew what it had been used for or what it was supposed to be. It just looked interesting and potentially useful and instantly created conversation. It seemed everyone wanted to suggest possible uses or what it was. These comments ranged from a replica of the Empire State building, to a planter, to a candle holder, to a golf ball storage rack. Once in the house it immediately found a home on the fire place mantle. Our daughter dropped by for a visit and tried turning into a candle home. Nothing fit. As I slouched in the living room chair across from it I glanced at the basket of rocks we have beside the fireplace. In 15 minutes I had chosen 9 of the 'leverites' that we didn't leave right where we found them over the years. I think the rock tower will be around for a long time and if those 9 rocks lose there attractiveness many more await their turn in the basket on the floor. Just another validation for looking forward to the next sunny Saturday morning we find ourselves out on the streets of town looking for those tell tale GS signs on the street corners.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Cliff and Edna
The first time they met she ran away.
But a plan was in place she could not change.
And it wasn’t the dreams she’d once dreamt
They exploded and died in a wartime event
The first time they met made his heart race
The young British beauty seemed out of place
Here in Canada in a Maritimes town
They shared war and its memories for loves common ground
At the Lord Nelson Hotel their marriage began
In his home village of Sable they settled down
A new life together but not fully planned
Sable Baptists were hard on a newcomers stand
It wasn’t long ‘tll she took three kids in hand
And followed their father to a British new land...
She stepped down from a train in Castlegar, B.C.
Mountains and bush as far as she could see
He’d gone ahead and a logger become
You do what it takes with a family to fund
It’s not what you do a as good Baptist son
And the cry if his parents for urgent return
Had him go back east dutifully drawn
Sick in the moment when he knew he was wrong
And they tried once more to make a go of it all
But in 7 more years headed west once more
This time Alberta was destined to be
Home with four kids in the family
Maybe they never had time to love
Maybe they didn’t seek help from the Lord above
But as children each of us knew
Our parents loved us and did all they could do
To give as their values to carry through life
To love our own children as they did us
And the commitment to this has proven so true
Passing it on is the least we could do
But a plan was in place she could not change.
And it wasn’t the dreams she’d once dreamt
They exploded and died in a wartime event
The first time they met made his heart race
The young British beauty seemed out of place
Here in Canada in a Maritimes town
They shared war and its memories for loves common ground
At the Lord Nelson Hotel their marriage began
In his home village of Sable they settled down
A new life together but not fully planned
Sable Baptists were hard on a newcomers stand
It wasn’t long ‘tll she took three kids in hand
And followed their father to a British new land...
She stepped down from a train in Castlegar, B.C.
Mountains and bush as far as she could see
He’d gone ahead and a logger become
You do what it takes with a family to fund
It’s not what you do a as good Baptist son
And the cry if his parents for urgent return
Had him go back east dutifully drawn
Sick in the moment when he knew he was wrong
And they tried once more to make a go of it all
But in 7 more years headed west once more
This time Alberta was destined to be
Home with four kids in the family
Maybe they never had time to love
Maybe they didn’t seek help from the Lord above
But as children each of us knew
Our parents loved us and did all they could do
To give as their values to carry through life
To love our own children as they did us
And the commitment to this has proven so true
Passing it on is the least we could do
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Father and Son in Scotland
SINCE OUR CONVERSATIONS IN OCTOBER ON THE TRAIN RIDE UP TO ST. ANDREWS AND SITTING IN THE PUB AT THE OLD COURSE , I HAVE OFTEN THOUGHT ABOUT OUR DIFFERING VIEWS ON THE WAR IN IRAQ AND THE AMERICAN PRESENCE THERE.
I AM WRITING TO TELL YOU THAT YOUR VIEWS AND KNOWLEDGE LEAD ME TO CHALLENGE MY OWN.
DIFFERENCES OF OPINIONS ARE COMMON EVERYDAY EVENTS. THE WAY YOU EXPRESSED YOURSELF MADE ME REALIZE THAT I WAS OVERLOOKING IMPORTANT INFORMATION OR MAYBE NEVER QUESTIONED MY AGING POINT OF VIEW.
READING “GODS POLITICS”, THE BOOK YOU GAVE ME FOR CHRISTMAS, I DISCOVERED THAT I HAD FALLEN IN TO A TRAP. THE TRAP IS: IF I BELIEVE IN GOD THEN GOD MUST BE ON THE SIDE OF WHAT I BELIEVE.
I'M PRETTY SURE THAT YOU SEE ALL OF THE RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN THE WORLD THROUGH OUT HISTORY AND IT RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS FOR YOU ABOUT THE NEED OR EVEN THE COMMON SENSE OF BELIEVING IN GOD IF THAT IS WHAT IT CAUSES PEOPLE TO DO.
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF CHRISTIANS, JEWS AND MOSLEMS AROUND THE WORLD BELIEVE THERE IS ONE GOD…THE SAME GOD. HOWEVER THEY HAVE DIFFERING VIEWS OF WHAT GOD WANTS TO DO HERE ON EARTH.
NO HUMAN BEING IN THE PAST OR THE PRESENT KNOWS ALL THE ANSWERS. UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF US THINK WE DO KNOW THE ANSWERS AND EVERY ONE THAT THINKS THEY KNOW THE ANSWERS FALLS INTO THE TRAP I MENTIONED. ‘IF I BELIEVE IN GOD THEN GOD MUST BE ON THE SIDE OF WHAT I BELIEVE.
FAITH IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL HUMAN FORCES. SO, WHEN A PERSON WHO BELIEVES IN GOD BELIEVES THAT GOD IS ON THE SIDE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE, SOMETIMES RADICALLY WRONG THINGS HAPPEN.
THAT IS WHY GEORGE BUSH IS DOING WHAT HE IS DOING.
THAT IS WHY SUICIDE BOMBERS ARE DOING WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
THAT IS WHY ISRAELI LEADERS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.
AND I KNOW THAT I’M NOT ALONE IN THE WORLD AS ONE OF THOSE BELIEVERS WHO HAS TAKEN THE SIDE OF MY RELIGION AND SUPPORTED IT.
IT GETS A LOT MORE COMPLICATED WHEN VERY BAD PEOPLE EXPLOIT PEOPLE WITH STRONG BELIEFS TO FURTHER THEIR OWN QUESTS FOR POWER, NO MATTER WHAT THE HUMAN COST.
I DON’T WANT THIS TO BECOME LONG WINDED. WITH ALL MY HEART I HOPE TO EXPRESS THE VALUABLE, INTELLIGENT INSIGHTS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED THROUGH THE DOORS THAT WERE OPENED BY YOUR VIEWPOINT.
WHEN I UNDERSTOOD THE TRAP I HAD FALLEN INTO I INSTANTLY RECOGNIZED HOW HORRIBLY WRONG SOME OF GEORGE BUSHES ACTIONS HAVE BEEN ALONG WITH ALL THE REST OF THE ‘LEADERS’ WHO ARE CAUSING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO DIE.
I’M NO EXPERT ON THE BIBLE BUT I DO KNOW THAT JESUS TALKS A LOT MORE ABOUT LOVING OTHER PEOPLE AND HELPING POOR AND DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE THAN HE DOES ABOUT IMPOSING VIOLENT SOLUTIONS TO THE WORLDS PROBLEMS.
THE BIBLE ALSO EMPHASIZES THAT THERE ARE NO PERFECT PEOPLE ON EARTH. THAT CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE TO ME BECAUSE THERE’S SO MUCH EVIDENCE TO BACK THAT UP.
I NOW BELIEVE A BETTER POINT OF VIEW IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF YOUR WAY OF THINKING. JUST BEING A CHRISTIAN OR A JEW OR MOSLEM DOESN’T MAKE ME ‘RIGHT’ AND DOESN’T GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE MY ‘RIGHT’ ON THE REST OF THE WORLD.
THANKS FOR READING THIS KES.
I HOPE I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WRITE IN A WAY THAT MAKES SOME SENSE.
I AM WRITING TO TELL YOU THAT YOUR VIEWS AND KNOWLEDGE LEAD ME TO CHALLENGE MY OWN.
DIFFERENCES OF OPINIONS ARE COMMON EVERYDAY EVENTS. THE WAY YOU EXPRESSED YOURSELF MADE ME REALIZE THAT I WAS OVERLOOKING IMPORTANT INFORMATION OR MAYBE NEVER QUESTIONED MY AGING POINT OF VIEW.
READING “GODS POLITICS”, THE BOOK YOU GAVE ME FOR CHRISTMAS, I DISCOVERED THAT I HAD FALLEN IN TO A TRAP. THE TRAP IS: IF I BELIEVE IN GOD THEN GOD MUST BE ON THE SIDE OF WHAT I BELIEVE.
I'M PRETTY SURE THAT YOU SEE ALL OF THE RELIGIOUS VIOLENCE IN THE WORLD THROUGH OUT HISTORY AND IT RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS FOR YOU ABOUT THE NEED OR EVEN THE COMMON SENSE OF BELIEVING IN GOD IF THAT IS WHAT IT CAUSES PEOPLE TO DO.
MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF CHRISTIANS, JEWS AND MOSLEMS AROUND THE WORLD BELIEVE THERE IS ONE GOD…THE SAME GOD. HOWEVER THEY HAVE DIFFERING VIEWS OF WHAT GOD WANTS TO DO HERE ON EARTH.
NO HUMAN BEING IN THE PAST OR THE PRESENT KNOWS ALL THE ANSWERS. UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF US THINK WE DO KNOW THE ANSWERS AND EVERY ONE THAT THINKS THEY KNOW THE ANSWERS FALLS INTO THE TRAP I MENTIONED. ‘IF I BELIEVE IN GOD THEN GOD MUST BE ON THE SIDE OF WHAT I BELIEVE.
FAITH IS ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL HUMAN FORCES. SO, WHEN A PERSON WHO BELIEVES IN GOD BELIEVES THAT GOD IS ON THE SIDE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE, SOMETIMES RADICALLY WRONG THINGS HAPPEN.
THAT IS WHY GEORGE BUSH IS DOING WHAT HE IS DOING.
THAT IS WHY SUICIDE BOMBERS ARE DOING WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
THAT IS WHY ISRAELI LEADERS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.
AND I KNOW THAT I’M NOT ALONE IN THE WORLD AS ONE OF THOSE BELIEVERS WHO HAS TAKEN THE SIDE OF MY RELIGION AND SUPPORTED IT.
IT GETS A LOT MORE COMPLICATED WHEN VERY BAD PEOPLE EXPLOIT PEOPLE WITH STRONG BELIEFS TO FURTHER THEIR OWN QUESTS FOR POWER, NO MATTER WHAT THE HUMAN COST.
I DON’T WANT THIS TO BECOME LONG WINDED. WITH ALL MY HEART I HOPE TO EXPRESS THE VALUABLE, INTELLIGENT INSIGHTS THAT I HAVE RECEIVED THROUGH THE DOORS THAT WERE OPENED BY YOUR VIEWPOINT.
WHEN I UNDERSTOOD THE TRAP I HAD FALLEN INTO I INSTANTLY RECOGNIZED HOW HORRIBLY WRONG SOME OF GEORGE BUSHES ACTIONS HAVE BEEN ALONG WITH ALL THE REST OF THE ‘LEADERS’ WHO ARE CAUSING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO DIE.
I’M NO EXPERT ON THE BIBLE BUT I DO KNOW THAT JESUS TALKS A LOT MORE ABOUT LOVING OTHER PEOPLE AND HELPING POOR AND DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE THAN HE DOES ABOUT IMPOSING VIOLENT SOLUTIONS TO THE WORLDS PROBLEMS.
THE BIBLE ALSO EMPHASIZES THAT THERE ARE NO PERFECT PEOPLE ON EARTH. THAT CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE TO ME BECAUSE THERE’S SO MUCH EVIDENCE TO BACK THAT UP.
I NOW BELIEVE A BETTER POINT OF VIEW IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF YOUR WAY OF THINKING. JUST BEING A CHRISTIAN OR A JEW OR MOSLEM DOESN’T MAKE ME ‘RIGHT’ AND DOESN’T GIVE ME THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE MY ‘RIGHT’ ON THE REST OF THE WORLD.
THANKS FOR READING THIS KES.
I HOPE I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WRITE IN A WAY THAT MAKES SOME SENSE.
Cloning Gods' Creations
I recently read an article about cloning in the Seattle Times newspaper.
The sub-headline read:
“Animal clones have proved far more complex than mere “doubles” – opening the new lines of genetic research and holding the promise of medical advances. But mysteries and controversy linger.”
The essence of this story is about an FDA announcement in December 2006 that meat from cloned cattle, pigs and goats s is safe to eat.
Samples of cloned beef and ordinary beef, required for the testing by the U.S.. Food and Drug Administration were provided by a company named Cyagra.
This is an American company in the cloning business that charges $17000 for a healthy cloned calf. Even they admit cloning for food isn’t financially viable at this time but there is no explanation of the need to have FDA approval.
It was 10 years ago Scottish scientists introduced “Dolly” the cloned goat to the world.
Dolly died at 6 suffering from arthritis and lung disease.
Cyagra Z, one of the American companies first clones, died in late January. She had gone from 1000 pounds down to 500 pounds and died of unknown causes.
In the 10 years since Dolly, cloning has revealed that clones are not identical to the DNA donor they are produced from and in the case of Cyagra Z, she was half the size of her DNA donor.
From here on the story gets more complicated as involved clone scientists explain they now know there is epigenetic code which is written by proteins and other chemical structures that surround or attach to DNA and determine how the code is read.
******
Doesn’t it seem that so often we hear in news stories that we can trust information if it is based on ‘good’ science.
It’s a deceiving premise when as Christians we know that only Gods science is complete and that man’s science is simply a step by step process of discovery.
We are dazzled and amazed at the incredible discoveries that scientists make.
The concept of intelligent design is impacting more scientists these days as being the only logical explanation for some of the intricate perfection they discover.
Yet we commonly hear of how science makes good science discoveries and then months or years down the road replace that science with some more good science.
The cloning science reported in this article is by its own admission incomplete.
Yet I don’t understand the desire to approve food for human consumption that so little is known about.
The sub-headline read:
“Animal clones have proved far more complex than mere “doubles” – opening the new lines of genetic research and holding the promise of medical advances. But mysteries and controversy linger.”
The essence of this story is about an FDA announcement in December 2006 that meat from cloned cattle, pigs and goats s is safe to eat.
Samples of cloned beef and ordinary beef, required for the testing by the U.S.. Food and Drug Administration were provided by a company named Cyagra.
This is an American company in the cloning business that charges $17000 for a healthy cloned calf. Even they admit cloning for food isn’t financially viable at this time but there is no explanation of the need to have FDA approval.
It was 10 years ago Scottish scientists introduced “Dolly” the cloned goat to the world.
Dolly died at 6 suffering from arthritis and lung disease.
Cyagra Z, one of the American companies first clones, died in late January. She had gone from 1000 pounds down to 500 pounds and died of unknown causes.
In the 10 years since Dolly, cloning has revealed that clones are not identical to the DNA donor they are produced from and in the case of Cyagra Z, she was half the size of her DNA donor.
From here on the story gets more complicated as involved clone scientists explain they now know there is epigenetic code which is written by proteins and other chemical structures that surround or attach to DNA and determine how the code is read.
******
Doesn’t it seem that so often we hear in news stories that we can trust information if it is based on ‘good’ science.
It’s a deceiving premise when as Christians we know that only Gods science is complete and that man’s science is simply a step by step process of discovery.
We are dazzled and amazed at the incredible discoveries that scientists make.
The concept of intelligent design is impacting more scientists these days as being the only logical explanation for some of the intricate perfection they discover.
Yet we commonly hear of how science makes good science discoveries and then months or years down the road replace that science with some more good science.
The cloning science reported in this article is by its own admission incomplete.
Yet I don’t understand the desire to approve food for human consumption that so little is known about.
Monday, January 15, 2007
With a sociologist now the Liberal Leader of Canada, its time for voters to prepare themselves to be manipulated for their votes on a level they have never experienced before.
To have any possibility of understanding what this means a little sociological kindergarten should be compulsory for everyone of voting age.
Unless of course you have a sociologist in your midst.
If so it may be too late …you have to vote Liberal just to keep yourself out of therapy.
Having only received a few glancing blows from contact with a sociologist in training ..read, studying for a PHD, I was able to turn on my computer and google to an enlightening website as I fought off the urge to declare allegiance to the Big Red L party.
So just what do sociologists believe?
How do they think?
What kind of soil are they rooted in?
The one thing I discovered when having a discussion with my sociologist friend is that it was very difficult to have a very enlightening conversation. That sociologist intellect provided such a higher insight on any worthy subject that it was difficult to communicate intelligently on any level lower than their own. And it seemed to me that if I did make a good point, the response became a plethora of large words that the whole point of the conversation wound down to an uncomfortable silence of change of topic.
Cutting back to the political scene, I was amazed how quickly Mr. Dionne was able to create sociological momentum in the way of casting out the spectre of Prime Minister Stephen Harper as the “worst” Prime Minister ever in terms of his environmental record.
Suddenly it seemed nearly every news commentary and government related story had some reference to global warming, and the incredible blame that needed to be layed at the feet of the minority government eco terror leader who has changed the course of global climate change in a few short months in power.
This slickly crafted strategy has us average Canadians hardly know what is happening to us. It’s like we have suddenly been given spiritual insight. Of course! The secret plan of that Conservative scoundrel…We should have known there was a diabolical plan hidden in the dark heart of Mr. Harper.
So if Mr. Dionne can uncover this global mystery in his first few weeks isn’t it just common sense knowledge to put this man in control so he can save our great land.
My sociologist friend says a good education provides the opportunity to become a critical thinker. Grasping that thought I head to my google site.
Wouldn’t you know it, critical thinking is mentioned in the first two paragraphs of the web page.
Quickly the page moves to the topic of how sociologists go about socially modifying knowledge.
“The sociology of knowledge involves the social psychology of consciousness and belief. This cognitive branch alerts us to the facts that we live in a second-hand world, that most of what we "know" is generally received uncritically from others, and that models of decision-making must take into account the roles of pluralistic ignorance, emotion, and the bearing of knowledge type (e.g., scientific, religious, commonsensical…”
The simple fact in this statement is that if you have not been taught “critical thinking” then you do not have the capability to decifer what is fact.
The underlying sociological theme we are being drawn into is that there is no right and wrong in the world so we as individuals can choose whatever we think is right.
Once we’re in that mind set we’ll believe anything, even the fact or non-fact that we have the most credible, straightforward, straight talking Prime Minister in Canada in decades.
We’ll even start to believe that we have a Prime Minister who has managed to govern effectively in a minority parliament for a short period of time has somehow managed to create an environmental disaster in Canada.
I think that Mr. Dionne has so little in the way of real issues to deal with that he dug into his sociological mind set to figure out a way of creating a magical mystery tour that will lead the catastrophe of global warming to the Prime Minster’s doorstep.
Sitting in Vancouver in January 2007 with a foot of snow on the ground and -10 I’m thinking global climate adjustment. Global climate adjustment has been with us since the beginning of time and in my house we believe there’s a Big Guy in charge of all of it and His name is not Stephen Harper.
To have any possibility of understanding what this means a little sociological kindergarten should be compulsory for everyone of voting age.
Unless of course you have a sociologist in your midst.
If so it may be too late …you have to vote Liberal just to keep yourself out of therapy.
Having only received a few glancing blows from contact with a sociologist in training ..read, studying for a PHD, I was able to turn on my computer and google to an enlightening website as I fought off the urge to declare allegiance to the Big Red L party.
So just what do sociologists believe?
How do they think?
What kind of soil are they rooted in?
The one thing I discovered when having a discussion with my sociologist friend is that it was very difficult to have a very enlightening conversation. That sociologist intellect provided such a higher insight on any worthy subject that it was difficult to communicate intelligently on any level lower than their own. And it seemed to me that if I did make a good point, the response became a plethora of large words that the whole point of the conversation wound down to an uncomfortable silence of change of topic.
Cutting back to the political scene, I was amazed how quickly Mr. Dionne was able to create sociological momentum in the way of casting out the spectre of Prime Minister Stephen Harper as the “worst” Prime Minister ever in terms of his environmental record.
Suddenly it seemed nearly every news commentary and government related story had some reference to global warming, and the incredible blame that needed to be layed at the feet of the minority government eco terror leader who has changed the course of global climate change in a few short months in power.
This slickly crafted strategy has us average Canadians hardly know what is happening to us. It’s like we have suddenly been given spiritual insight. Of course! The secret plan of that Conservative scoundrel…We should have known there was a diabolical plan hidden in the dark heart of Mr. Harper.
So if Mr. Dionne can uncover this global mystery in his first few weeks isn’t it just common sense knowledge to put this man in control so he can save our great land.
My sociologist friend says a good education provides the opportunity to become a critical thinker. Grasping that thought I head to my google site.
Wouldn’t you know it, critical thinking is mentioned in the first two paragraphs of the web page.
Quickly the page moves to the topic of how sociologists go about socially modifying knowledge.
“The sociology of knowledge involves the social psychology of consciousness and belief. This cognitive branch alerts us to the facts that we live in a second-hand world, that most of what we "know" is generally received uncritically from others, and that models of decision-making must take into account the roles of pluralistic ignorance, emotion, and the bearing of knowledge type (e.g., scientific, religious, commonsensical…”
The simple fact in this statement is that if you have not been taught “critical thinking” then you do not have the capability to decifer what is fact.
The underlying sociological theme we are being drawn into is that there is no right and wrong in the world so we as individuals can choose whatever we think is right.
Once we’re in that mind set we’ll believe anything, even the fact or non-fact that we have the most credible, straightforward, straight talking Prime Minister in Canada in decades.
We’ll even start to believe that we have a Prime Minister who has managed to govern effectively in a minority parliament for a short period of time has somehow managed to create an environmental disaster in Canada.
I think that Mr. Dionne has so little in the way of real issues to deal with that he dug into his sociological mind set to figure out a way of creating a magical mystery tour that will lead the catastrophe of global warming to the Prime Minster’s doorstep.
Sitting in Vancouver in January 2007 with a foot of snow on the ground and -10 I’m thinking global climate adjustment. Global climate adjustment has been with us since the beginning of time and in my house we believe there’s a Big Guy in charge of all of it and His name is not Stephen Harper.
Monday, January 08, 2007
If we obey just one of Gods Laws: love our neighbour as we love ourselves, it would solve nearly all of the worlds strife. Think about this in the context of a news story about Muslims in a California town who requested a day off from school to honor a Muslim holiday and in reaction to the school board that voted to eliminate all religious holidays including Christmas and Easter.
From a Christian viewpoint it is a terrible infringement on something we thought was our right... is part of who we are. Additionally there is a likely hood for Christians to blame Muslims for the elimination of Christian holidays.
This whole question of religious difference is something that is really tearing apart people who essentially are worshiping the same God. Along the way Jesus Christ set a new covenant that Jews chose to disregard and over a twelve hundred years later Mohammed began a new offshoot when he believed that God had spoken to him about another way to be in relationship with Allah.
These differences really are at the centre of much of what is going on in the world today. Fighting in the name of the God they believe in. No one knows Gods plan in this. Great harm is being done to those people living outside of any of these belief systems. Many young people choose to not have any belief system because they don’t want to take part in fighting over who is right.
As a Christian I believe that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior and will return one day and Bible prophecy says that day will be when Jews believe he is their Saviour.
In terms of how we are going to get to that day these religions , these people who worship the same God have to find ways to respect and acknowledge their differences and do that while worshiping God in their way and loving one another as they would want themselves to be loved…obeying Gods Law. Ultimately that is how we will get to the day when we all are under one roof so to speak.
When that happens the whole world will see a new way of understanding that we are all children of one God one Creator. New desire for worshiping God will flourish.
Maybe this issue of Christian holidays can lead us, since our laws, in our democracy set standards that come from Biblical belief. Daily we see those standards being chipped away by secular reasoning and that is way out of the comfort zone.
If we’re going to be a leader in change, Christians needs to show mercy, forgiveness and grace and love for our neighbours, our kin who believe in the same God but at this time in history just don’t see it in the same way. In terms of Christian holidays democratic countries possibly need to learn to accept and honor other religious holidays.
Today in Muslim countries just the admission that you are a Christian could be life threatening. This does not add up with the ultimate truth of Gods will through Jesus Christ. The extremist Islamic belief that they are on a world mission to wipe out Christians and Jews creates extreme wariness. If peaceful existence and tolerance is truly a cornerstone for doing Gods will, whether Jewish, Islamic or Christian those forces need to step forward and make themselves known to their brothers and sisters.
Change is slow and difficult. Christians and Muslims do not know each other well and we hear much that is not true about the other. If we are to find common ground it must come from making Gods Love the major force….God centered love in the hearts of many will create acceptance of one Creator.
God’s plan for us and Christ’s promise to us is based upon the reality that we do have to change the way we look at things. We as believers in God our Creator must initiate and grow this change that is going to come about as history unfolds so that one day we can worship our One God.
As Christians we must avoid the self righteousness that we were right along and it just took the rest of you a while to come on board. We must grow toward that place where we all recognize the same path to salvation.
Once we become a united force in love, only then can we see the forces of Satan incredibly weakened. As long as this fighting among ourselves is so prevalent we give great power to the choice to not acknowledge God in any framework.
There needs to be all Gods children under one roof for the days of glory to come upon us.
From a Christian viewpoint it is a terrible infringement on something we thought was our right... is part of who we are. Additionally there is a likely hood for Christians to blame Muslims for the elimination of Christian holidays.
This whole question of religious difference is something that is really tearing apart people who essentially are worshiping the same God. Along the way Jesus Christ set a new covenant that Jews chose to disregard and over a twelve hundred years later Mohammed began a new offshoot when he believed that God had spoken to him about another way to be in relationship with Allah.
These differences really are at the centre of much of what is going on in the world today. Fighting in the name of the God they believe in. No one knows Gods plan in this. Great harm is being done to those people living outside of any of these belief systems. Many young people choose to not have any belief system because they don’t want to take part in fighting over who is right.
As a Christian I believe that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior and will return one day and Bible prophecy says that day will be when Jews believe he is their Saviour.
In terms of how we are going to get to that day these religions , these people who worship the same God have to find ways to respect and acknowledge their differences and do that while worshiping God in their way and loving one another as they would want themselves to be loved…obeying Gods Law. Ultimately that is how we will get to the day when we all are under one roof so to speak.
When that happens the whole world will see a new way of understanding that we are all children of one God one Creator. New desire for worshiping God will flourish.
Maybe this issue of Christian holidays can lead us, since our laws, in our democracy set standards that come from Biblical belief. Daily we see those standards being chipped away by secular reasoning and that is way out of the comfort zone.
If we’re going to be a leader in change, Christians needs to show mercy, forgiveness and grace and love for our neighbours, our kin who believe in the same God but at this time in history just don’t see it in the same way. In terms of Christian holidays democratic countries possibly need to learn to accept and honor other religious holidays.
Today in Muslim countries just the admission that you are a Christian could be life threatening. This does not add up with the ultimate truth of Gods will through Jesus Christ. The extremist Islamic belief that they are on a world mission to wipe out Christians and Jews creates extreme wariness. If peaceful existence and tolerance is truly a cornerstone for doing Gods will, whether Jewish, Islamic or Christian those forces need to step forward and make themselves known to their brothers and sisters.
Change is slow and difficult. Christians and Muslims do not know each other well and we hear much that is not true about the other. If we are to find common ground it must come from making Gods Love the major force….God centered love in the hearts of many will create acceptance of one Creator.
God’s plan for us and Christ’s promise to us is based upon the reality that we do have to change the way we look at things. We as believers in God our Creator must initiate and grow this change that is going to come about as history unfolds so that one day we can worship our One God.
As Christians we must avoid the self righteousness that we were right along and it just took the rest of you a while to come on board. We must grow toward that place where we all recognize the same path to salvation.
Once we become a united force in love, only then can we see the forces of Satan incredibly weakened. As long as this fighting among ourselves is so prevalent we give great power to the choice to not acknowledge God in any framework.
There needs to be all Gods children under one roof for the days of glory to come upon us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)