April 19, 2008
Yet Another In A Series Of Satirical Environment Related Posts: Earth Day Suggestions
It's a well known and scientifically accepted truth that we are all on the verge of a major environmental catastrophe, which can only be averted by the election of Bronco Bomber. Unfortunately, we can't count on the gun-toting, God-clinging, xenophobic racists who vote in this country to recognize the Obamessiah as the Planet's one and only salvation. It doesn't look good for the old Obameister right now, but don't despair. We can still do our part. Here are thirteen practical suggestions for making this year's Earth Day count:
- Refrain from swatting any flies. Flies are people too, and swatting is a violent act. Instead, try talking to the fly without preconditions.
- Don't needlessly waste electricity at night. Turn off all your lights and stop watching tv. Instead, read a book and use your cell phone as a reading light.
- Rather than waste water by going in your toilet, reuse old plastic grocery bags instead. Better yet, don't flush and plant a tree in the bowl. Presto, instant carbon offset!
- If you're already walking or biking to work, bravo for you. But remember that you exhale more CO2 when you exercise. Offset that contribution to greenhouse gasses by carrying a co-worker on your back.
- Did you know that leaving the tap running while you brush your teeth wastes about thirty gallons of water a day? Stop brushing your teeth.
- Don't buy any product that was ever manufactured, assembled, transported, marketed or sold by a large corporation. Instead, make all your own stuff. I know a guy named Fred who furnished his entire house using only natural materials he found locally or brought home from work.
- Watching tv is a huge waste of electricity, but if you must watch your favorite show, wait for the re-runs. It's a great way to recycle.
- Act. Be active. Activate. Actualize. Activist. Accentuate. Use these words in a sentence.
- Wear hemp jewelry. My boyfriend proposed by giving me a hemp ring he made himself out of some free twine he stole from IKEA.
- Browbeat your friends into becoming environmentally conscious. Guilt-trip them about eating meat. Set their pets free. Just be obnoxious in general.
- Paint your house green. Then tell everybody you live in a green house. They won't know.
- Practice Zero Population Growth responsibly. For instance, a hollowed out leek makes a great condom.
- Water plants with your own blood.
Posted by: annika at
10:25 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 421 words, total size 3 kb.
1
You know, this along with your "save the earth" button might qualify you for a Nobel.
Posted by: Stew at April 19, 2008 01:38 PM (swd4s)
2
Yes, Stew, that is precious work.
Annie, you've outdone yourself, yet again. That list is friggin' hilarious. Points #4 and #12 were my favorites.
Though, I would modify #4 to just say: "Don't breath...at all. Your mere existence further weakens Mother Gaia, you selfish prick."
The only thing that is more nauseating than the hysteria generated by "climate change" are the "solutions" that politicians want to implement. They seem to be nothing more than Luddite-inspired versions of the Great Leap Forward, but in reverse*.
I'm not looking forward to when this thread is inevitably hijacked by a certain greeny, "moderate" killjoy.
*Dismantling our industrialized economy in order to make environmental "progress"
Posted by: 08nagaer at April 19, 2008 01:58 PM (e55SP)
3
Nice list oh Funny One.
Did you borrow number 8 from the Obomber people? It really reminds me of their campaign, words without qualifiers.
Posted by: Mike C. at April 20, 2008 09:04 AM (wearR)
4
Eh, I've been doing all of those things for years, but in my case out of sheer spite.
On a tangentially related note, dear Hemlock's father has passed. You may enjoy his brilliant observation of the human condition. Don't miss the last two paragraphs. They're positively Waughvian.
Alas, I can't post the link, since munu hates certain websites. Just search for Hemlock.
Posted by: Casca at April 21, 2008 02:32 PM (gOOVv)
5
"For instance, a hollowed out leek makes a great condom..."
"Eh, I've been doing all of those things for years, but in my case out of sheer spite."
Buh?...
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at April 21, 2008 04:45 PM (xHyDY)
6
Fuggit, I'll post the verbage. Hemlock lives in Hong Kong, and has traveled to Blighty for the event. The last two paragraphs of his post:
The big excitement in this little community today is a children's party in the church hall. At one stage in the proceedings a parent displays his deeply held and already well-known convictions and his determination to shape his offspring accordingly. “No, Tarquin!” the man suddenly shrieks across the room as if his three-year-old son is about to stick a finger into a power socket. The father leaps over and snatches a small hot dog from the petrified child's hand. The kid bursts into tears. The father turns to the dozen or so stunned adult onlookers. “Tarquin doesn't eat meat!” he exclaims. Tarquin goes into a tantrum, wailing and thumping the floor and pointing at other toddlers chewing their pork-laced little morsels. His dad, posessed by the total righteousness of his behaviour, holds up the offending item. “He obviously confused it with the vegetarian sausages we have at home.”
At Stonegallows Hall, plans for my father's funeral have been finalized. On hearing that it would be a humanist affair, I assumed it would be brief, informal and without such baubles as a grandiose coffin and extravagant wreaths. I pictured a simple consignment to the earth in a pleasant and unmarked spot, the body perhaps tied in a plain cotton shroud, with some acorns thrown in as the grave is filled with the last few inches of soil. Provided no druids turned up, that would have satisfied the old man's atheism and dislike of fuss and ritual, and mildly offended all the right people currently organizing masses to be said for him on both sides of the Atlantic for the repose of his soul. As it happens, survivors have ordered shiny casket, flowers, pall bearers – the full works. The standard Christian ceremony with God carefully teased out. It is for people who say they don't want, need or believe in something, but deep down they really do. In this respect – and I am absolutely positive there is no other – it can perhaps be likened to a vegetarian sausage.
Posted by: Casca at April 21, 2008 09:30 PM (gOOVv)
April 17, 2008
Best Pickle Discovery Of The Year
Oh Baby Baby, how was I supposed to know...
...that these plain-wrap brand pickles would be so dang tasty.
I got them at Ralph's.
N.B. This post should in no way be construed as having been inspired by, or being in any way related to the previous post.
Posted by: annika at
05:59 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.
March 01, 2008
Help Save The Earth!
You may have seen a lot of applications on places like Facebook and MySpace, which promise to save the rainforests and stop global warming every time you click the mouse on their button.CLICK HERE TO HELP SAVE THE EARTH
I want to get in the act, because I care too. So here it is, save the earth, the Annika's Journal way. The more you click, the more you help save the earth.
Thanks for helping to save the earth. If we all work together, we can do it. For instance if ten thousand people clicked on that button this month it could actually help save the earth something like ten thousand times faster than normal earth saving methods would. If ten billion people clicked on that button, we might have so much earth savingness, that we could build another earth or planet or whatever. Which is pretty amazing if you think about it, and makes me feel real good about myself and how I'm doing my part and all.
Posted by: annika at
09:36 AM
| Comments (37)
| Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.
1
EARTH FIRST! We'll mine the other planets later.
Posted by: Casca at March 01, 2008 03:09 PM (MQ9LJ)
2
Sean Connery recently started up his own eco-website to spearhead his new "Shave the Earth" campaign.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at March 02, 2008 05:02 AM (0dGoX)
3
Kevin, you little weirdo.
Crawl back under yuor rock.
Posted by: shelly at March 02, 2008 10:13 AM (wearR)
4
Woohoo! I just saved the earth!
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at March 02, 2008 07:39 PM (lYyjB)
5
Woohoo! I just saved it again!
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at March 02, 2008 07:39 PM (lYyjB)
6
Ok. I'm tired now. Someone else save the Earth. I've done enough.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at March 02, 2008 07:41 PM (lYyjB)
7
EMH:
The girl tries to be serious and you mock her.
Watch it. She has lots of friends.
Posted by: shelly at March 03, 2008 03:33 AM (wearR)
8
"yuor rock"
Is that Chinese? I'm half-Korean, you little weirdo. You wanna wrightuh eenuh duh KOHreeuhn ack-sentuh, you happ-uh too DOO RIKE-uh DEESSE!
Heh.
Signed,
IM Korean & I8 Ur K9
throw me a frickin' bone, will ya'?
Posted by: Kevin Kim at March 03, 2008 04:28 AM (VhMXe)
9
heh
'type="submit" name="Save the earth" value="Save the earth"'
You could even do a 'value="reduce man-bear-pig"' as a follow up!
Posted by: Stew at March 04, 2008 07:03 PM (swd4s)
10
Yes, clicking little buttons don't help.
And the purpose is not really to save the Earth, it's to preserve a habitat that will support human civilization while not creating a 6th mass extinction...whoops, too late....
With grain crops in their 6th year of failing to meet consumption, grain stockpiles are at a 34 year low. I don't need to tell you that fresh water is an increasingly rare commodity.
And don't be surprised if oil hits $200 in the next 3 years; don't expect much of an economy, regardless of who's in office.
There's more, like the unfolding North American natural gas crisis, which is the feedstock for nitrogen fertilizer production - over 50% of which is now imported - , the cornerstone of electrical grid stability, and the home heating fuel for 52% of American homes, but that'll do for starters...
The Earth will be here long after humanity has brought on self-inflicted overshoot, it will just be a tad trashy until the aftereffects of humanity are subsumed again.
Posted by: will at March 05, 2008 03:08 PM (GzvlQ)
11
It's always entertaining to get the Malthusian slant. It just reminds me of the punchline, "Don't fuck with Uncle Mike when he's been drinking." Don't fuck with the USofA. Nothing unites us more than hardship. Like the man said, "We'll put a boot in your ass. It's the American way."
Posted by: Casca at March 06, 2008 10:55 AM (MQ9LJ)
12
Funny you should mention Malthus and odd references to boots, perhaps you've been drinking....
From the Financial Times (hardly a hippy hangout...)
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/62473c48-e4d7-11dc-a495-0000779fd2ac.html
February has been the month for revisiting old and unpleasant economic concepts. Last week, financial markets experienced that 1970s feeling, as a combination of rising inflation and unemployment in the US triggered unwelcome memories of the decade of stagflation that ended the postwar golden age and the Keynesian consensus. Then came this week's report that the United Nations' world food programme might have to ration food aid. Set against a backdrop of rising food prices worldwide - global food prices have now risen by more than 75 per cent since their lows of 2000, jumping more than 20 per cent in 2007 alone - the news revived fears from a much earlier era, conjuring up the Reverend Thomas Malthus.
Soaring food prices have also revived some more contemporary worries. When China's annual inflation rate spiked to an 11-year high in January on the back of an 18 per cent increase in food prices, China-watchers found themselves casting their minds back to the food price rises of 1988 and the social disturbances, protests and civil unrest that followed. Inflation is often cited as one of the factors behind the major demonstrations in 1989.
Posted by: will at March 06, 2008 02:49 PM (GzvlQ)
13
I'm always amazed at the quantity of supposedly educated people who reference Malthus, and get him exactly wrong. I had a professor, business type, who fell into that category, simply amazing. I guess they hear "shortages", and run with it.
Malthus didn't say that we'd have shortages created by governmental policies. He said that we'd have shortages created by the population outgrowing our ability to produce. That's just not the case. We have the ability to produce, if only we could remove the heavy hand of the GOS-plan types, and the enviro-loons, from the tiller that guides this big blue marble. Alas, that usually takes a revolution.
Posted by: Casca at March 06, 2008 05:33 PM (MQ9LJ)
14
Kevin:
I didn't say "Crawl back under your ROK", I said under your "rock".
But, do whatever turns you on, you weirdo. We just don't want to know about it.
Posted by: Shelly at March 07, 2008 02:56 AM (wearR)
15
I want to know about it. I like Kevin. He's a funny and talented mofo. Now you on the other hand... clearly an acquired taste.
Posted by: Casca at March 07, 2008 08:27 AM (FzhYM)
16
Casca, for what it's worth, I read Shelly as simply busting my balls in a friendly manner. He and I have had amicable exchanges in the past.
Shelly: the things that turn me on are here. I keep all that safely away from this fine-smelling blog.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at March 07, 2008 09:20 AM (VhMXe)
17
Some cry over a harsh word. I didn't want you to wander away because Shelly had crushed your spirit. You'll need all your strength to fight off thw werewolves as you cross middle America.
Posted by: Casca at March 07, 2008 01:20 PM (xGZ+b)
18
> That's just not the case. We have the ability to produce, if only we could remove the heavy hand of the GOS-plan types, and the enviro-loons, from the tiller that guides this big blue marble. Alas, that usually takes a revolution.
Bush and the Republicans have a had a free hand over the last 6 years, even appointing a Monsanto exec to head the USDA. In that time, agricultural production in the US dropped. Surprised?
http://www.italy.usembassy.gov/pdf/other/98-253.pdf
"The agricultural trade surplus, projected to be $3.5 billion, is at its lowest level in 19
years." --2006 data
Wheat went from over 2.2 billion bushels in 1999 down below 1.9 billion bushels in 2006.
http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/PullData_US.jsp
All beans went from 33,146 thousand hundredweight in 1999 to 24,247 thousand hundredweight in 2006.
Even the cattle inventory went from 2,281.1 thousand head in 1999 to 2,262.8 thousand head in 2006.
http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/Create_Federal_All.jsp#top
The land of surpluses is experiencing a dramatic drop in food output. And the shift to ethanol is creating a food shortfall, with food stockpiles at a 34 year low. You can rant about old arguments against Malthus, but current economists are now dusting off his concept;
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/62473c48-e4d7-11dc-a495-0000779fd2ac.html
Posted by: will at March 07, 2008 03:09 PM (GzvlQ)
19
Rant? Who's ranting? Lol, go find a mirror. You fail to grasp the nut of the argument. Malthus said we wouldn't be able to produce enough. We can. There may be shortages, but they are caused by government, and dysfunctional markets, usually caused by government. It's not because we don't have the ability to produce. Ethanol is a crime. Arrest the loons, and hang the congressfucks who wrote the law.
Blaming Bush hardly answers the mail. It wouldn't matter who the head of the USDA was. We have fewer US cattle in production because of that union-thug bogeyman NAFTA. It so happens that the Canucks raise steers more cheaply than we do. So meat is in surplus, and excessively cheap.
Posted by: Casca at March 07, 2008 04:01 PM (MQ9LJ)
20
Of course they do. Markets are cyclical.
Will, you remind me of a lot of the people with whom I work, absolutely zero retention. Go back and read what I've written, then take a pill, or vice versa.
Posted by: Casca at March 09, 2008 07:24 AM (MQ9LJ)
21
You continue to provide deflective and canned non-responses, so I'll leave it at that. Look at the data provided if you ever want to come out of your bubble.
Posted by: will at March 09, 2008 05:40 PM (h7Ciu)
22
And you boyo are a tedious ass, wrapped so tightly in your worldview that no light gets in.
Posted by: Casca at March 09, 2008 09:19 PM (MQ9LJ)
23
Oh, down to pointless jabs in an attempt to look witty? Ok, I join in the pointlessness, "You are so incredibly dense that light bends around you." A favorite one from my physics days.
Your own jab would poke you in the face if you held it up to a mirror.
Posted by: will at March 10, 2008 02:46 PM (h7Ciu)
24
LMAO, OMG, ya got me. Now go away.
Posted by: Casca at March 11, 2008 09:14 AM (FzhYM)
25
You certainly KNEW the moonbattery would be in rare form for the whole delicious Spitzer meltdown!
the Emporer Club was a Bushco fake Fed front company like Brewster Jennings was, you know, a fake company to lure in those they want to persecute
“Look at the birdie! Nice birdie! What a pretty birdie! Come here birdie! Make the American people look over there birdie!!!”, cried the Bush Regime once again to divert Americans away from their own criminal cover ups
Some of the Wall Street Robber Barons finally called in markers from Bushco.
A U.S. Attorney did what he was told by Abu Ali Gonzales and Cheney, so he wouldnÂ’t get canned with the rest of them
At least my Spitzer was boinking a woman instead of a boy or propositioning some undercover male police officer like so many reptilicans seem to do
Posted by: Radical Redneck at March 11, 2008 09:31 AM (bpQk3)
26
> "Markets are cyclical."
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/CW/M
Posted by: will at March 11, 2008 09:47 AM (z62e3)
27
Screw saving the earth: destroying it is so much more fun.
Posted by: Dave J at March 11, 2008 03:22 PM (jUUaH)
28
It's time for some AI posting around here. Are Simon and I the only ones who'd like to choke the shit out of Paula, and dump her ass out in the desert?
Posted by: Casca at March 11, 2008 08:24 PM (MQ9LJ)
29
Actually, I'd rather f*** the shit out of Paula, spank her ass, and take a dump out in the desert.
But then again, I'd be glad to choke the shit out of Simon and dump his ass out in the desert.
Posted by: shelly at March 14, 2008 01:11 AM (Mx9HN)
30
Yes, but you've been disconnected from reality for years.
Posted by: Casca at March 14, 2008 06:39 AM (xGZ+b)
31
Wuhoh, looks like Radical Redneck needs your services: http://startelegram.typepad.com/sky_talk/2008/03/woman-files-law.html
Posted by: Casca at March 15, 2008 02:35 PM (MQ9LJ)
32
"There's something about Mary" on an airplane.
OMG. Call Homeland Security.
Years ago, on a flight to Amsterdam, my wife got bored and decided to join the Mile High Club. It was dark and there were three seats across and we had but two of them. Just about the crucial time, she shifted and the blanket exposed her (and me) to the lady next to us sitting by the window. Did she call the stewardess? Hell no.
She took out her bible and began to pray.
I was laughing so hard I couldn't finish.
Posted by: Shelly at March 18, 2008 04:19 PM (AiJXe)
33
I don't want to dieeeeeeee. And I agree with Will.
All of us need to get off our lazy asses and help, but how?
The world is filled with billions and billions of people!
How do we get them to all listen?
Posted by: Alex at March 27, 2008 07:51 AM (YrCv4)
34
Look what you've been up to while I was off blogs and beef for Lent! Saving the Earth, pointless yet humorous arguing...Who's Malthus? Was that Russell Crowe's sidekick in "Gladiator"? So much for my liberal arts education! I'm still not convinced the Earth needs saving as much as we're hearing, but my kids are completely brainwashed by the school on that score.
Posted by: Joules at March 27, 2008 08:44 AM (28NFV)
35
Oh, that lady was just reading Song of Solomon and praying something similar might happen to her someday.
Posted by: Joules at March 28, 2008 06:19 PM (28NFV)
36
>The world is filled with billions and billions of people! How do we get them to all listen?
Start with yourself first, then share what you've done with friends, family, and neighbors. Or start a blog...
Posted by: will at April 02, 2008 12:40 PM (GzvlQ)
37
is this thing still on?
Posted by: annika at April 17, 2008 08:51 AM (kKccv)
April 30, 2007
Annika's Journal Farewell Tour, Part V: Just To Be Clear
I will not be coming back to do one hour specials on "owatism" and "dipression."
Posted by: annika at
07:02 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Rats. Now that you are quitting the rest of us will have to get a life.
Posted by: Jake at April 30, 2007 08:29 AM (V6rxT)
2
you are right Beth. I will have to make that a subject of a future post on my Farewell Tour.
Posted by: annika at April 30, 2007 08:53 AM (WfR6S)
3
Don't quit. Just allow yourself to succumb to the temptation to blog something every once in a while, and the rest of the time, pull a Bill Whittle. 
That'll give you plenty of time for the Bar exam, and you get to participate in at least one aspect of a life (Note: Not a normal life, just a life).
That'll give you plenty of time for the Bar exam, and you get to participate in at least one aspect of a life (Note: Not a normal life, just a life).Posted by: ElMondoHummus at April 30, 2007 12:58 PM (xHyDY)
4
Bill Whittle gets thousands of hits a day, even when he hasn't posted something for months!
Posted by: annika at April 30, 2007 01:03 PM (zAOEU)
5
Then just post some skin shots. You'll get thousands of hits too. Better yet, secretly annoint me as co-blogger-in-chief, and I'll take care of everything. You'll be really popular then. lmao
Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 07:24 AM (Y7t14)
6
I'm getting a picture here...it's dim, but it is coming into focus. Here it is; I can see it clearly now...
"Annika and Casca's Journal"
Hey, I'd stick aound and we might even loose that weirdo liberal who keeps gadflying in...
Posted by: shelly at May 01, 2007 01:40 PM (2nDll)
7
Maybe I should make her a cash offer?
Posted by: Casca at May 01, 2007 07:14 PM (2gORp)
8
Isn't that called "pandering"? Or "solicitation"?
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at May 02, 2007 06:52 AM (xHyDY)
April 26, 2007
Random Thought
Fucken-a, why is Yahoo being so slow all the time? Holy crap.
Posted by: annika at
05:38 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.
April 15, 2007
Observation
I seriously don't know how people did their taxes before Turbotax.
More: Carlos Mencia explains why we need taxes.
Posted by: annika at
11:16 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'll second that, having used it for the first time this year. Is anyone else as annoyed as I am by the sheer amount of time this convoluted tax code costs us? The calculation to decide whether to take a credit or deduction for tuition is longer than most of the returns I filed.
Something is wrong when we need to buy a program or see a professional just to figure out how much we need to pay. The law should force Congress to do their own taxes without assistance.
Posted by: MarkD at April 16, 2007 05:06 AM (5vbH6)
2
It's kinda tough being a tax lawyer and a small-government conservative at the same time. If it weren't for democrats, I'd actually have to do something productive for a living. Scary.
Posted by: taxlawmax at April 16, 2007 08:43 AM (dLe9c)
3
Over/under on when the enabling media finaly release the inevitably I-slamic name of the Va Tech mass murderer?
Posted by: Radical Redneck at April 16, 2007 11:17 AM (sX7GP)
4
Can't get onto Liveleak.com from work. Anybody catch the injured student's description of the shooter?
Posted by: taxlawmax at April 16, 2007 11:58 AM (dLe9c)
5
The only description I've read is this: "Witnesses described him as a man in his 20s, wearing a maroon cap and a black leather jacket."
My favorite line from the MSNBC account of the shootings:
Jamal Albarghouti, a graduate student, said that instead of fleeing, he began shooting video footage on his cell phone.
“I’m from the Middle East, so I’m not used to this sort of thing, but I’ve been in similar situations,” Albarghouti told MSNBC-TV.
Is it just me, or did he manage to squeeze two non sequiturs into a single sentence?
I saw Mencia last night. Got a laugh from that segment, but his underlying premise is wrong: it's not taxes that distinguish this country from a Third World shithole. It's private industry, not government, that creates wealth.
Posted by: Matt at April 16, 2007 02:15 PM (10G2T)
6
"I seriously don't know how people did their taxes before Turbotax."
Accountant?
Posted by: Mark at April 18, 2007 09:09 AM (2MrBP)
April 14, 2007
Observation
I seriously don't know how people did chores like vacuuming and ironing before the iPod.
Posted by: annika at
02:54 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Well, at least they could move the iron board in front of the television or radio set back in the day.
I guess I'll post this before the work week resumes....
Off-Topic: For those of you that remember the link about Japan's surrender, there was a follow-up or something: "Japanese Troops Turn Botched Concert Into Nanking"
I believe the artist was a Battle Royale fan. BTW, the guy talking to the TV was MXC's "Vic Romano".
Posted by: reagan80 at April 14, 2007 11:17 PM (fO04l)
2
I don't know how people do them after the iPod, ugh!
Posted by: shelly at April 15, 2007 10:14 AM (A5s0y)
3
You'll have to ask Lupe the Mexican maid. I don't know how any of that stuff gets done. I use mine for isolation during any public interaction, like shopping.
Posted by: Casca at April 15, 2007 12:09 PM (Y7t14)
April 02, 2007
Annika Asks Her Readers
John Hawkins has his polls, I have mine.
Posted by: annika at
07:36 PM
| Comments (14)
| Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 7 kb.
1
Call us anything you like. At least we are called, BITCH!
Posted by: Casca at April 02, 2007 09:14 PM (2gORp)
2
The Fighting Griffins of Reed College won't make the NCAA, or the NIT. Back when I attended, we competed in rugby and ultimate frisbee. I don't think times have changed.
The Travelocity Gnome can be compared to the King of Burger King, but at least the King is scary. The gnome is a bunch of nothingness.
If God had meant us to eat salad sandwiches, lettuce would sprout out of wheat stalks.
I have no idea who any of this years American Idolwannabes are. But I did enjoy WB's parody of American Idol, where they chose the worst people and had three judges (the smartmouth, the black guy, and the nice girl) just like you know who.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at April 02, 2007 09:31 PM (P8ktI)
3
Next year we'll see whose the Bitch. Florida.
Posted by: Chuck at April 03, 2007 01:28 PM (iXWYc)
4
Yeah, Jessica Simpson is pretty and Jessica Alba is hot....BUT Jessica Biel has an AMAZING ass!
Posted by: blu at April 03, 2007 03:03 PM (j8oa6)
5
The Travelocity Gnome is one of the reasons I stopped watching what used to be my favorite TV Show-- The Amazing Race.
It was a combination of the retarded gnome, and Rob and Amber, and the constant influx of model/actresses and token gays. What a waste of a show.
Posted by: Jihad Jimmy, Minister of War Crimes and Chief Defender of the Faith at April 03, 2007 05:18 PM (6PPyr)
6
Tsk, tsk, Casca.
Don't worry. OSU will win a National Championship one day soon (and, a monkey will jump out of your ass at the same time).
Posted by: shelly at April 04, 2007 07:00 AM (JQe3J)
7
Quit drooling on the kybd, and go take your medications, before they have to take you back to the farm for a visit.
Posted by: Casca at April 04, 2007 07:05 AM (Y7t14)
8
Ooops, what I meant to say was, probably before you're taking a dirt nap, you old bastard.
Posted by: Casca at April 04, 2007 07:07 AM (Y7t14)
9
I have seen many UCLA and USC National Championships, and will live to see many more.
You may outlive me, but you may still never see a National Championship for OSU again, well, at least as long as Florida is around to be their Daddy.
Posted by: shelly at April 04, 2007 07:43 AM (JQe3J)
10
With the favor of the motorcycle gods, I WILL outlive you safe in the knowledge that the Buckeyes will win again.
Posted by: Casca at April 04, 2007 04:09 PM (2gORp)
11
Wear your helmet.
Although, that won't do you much good against a semi that has lost his brakes.
Posted by: shelly at April 04, 2007 05:10 PM (JQe3J)
12
Dammit! A friend of mine is vacationing in Hawaii, and called to wake me from my nap to feed me this pathetic poke in my eye. He of course read it on Rodger's blog. I will henceforth always get a boost when I hear about the failure of the perpetually pathetic Bears.
Posted by: Casca at April 04, 2007 11:17 PM (2gORp)
13
The Bears? They are the Chicago Cubs of California. Pick on someone your own size, like UCLA or USC.
Both my teams are winners, but they do, like Florida's Bitches, lose occassionally. Yuo can rejoice then.
In the meantime, in the immortal words of Leo Durocher, "Wait 'til next year."
Posted by: shelly at April 05, 2007 07:58 AM (2nDll)
14
I like the gnome. He's a fairly genteel and quaintly funny (like your nerdy English uncle) little guy in a world of t.v. madness. I like him better on radio so you can imagine what he looks like. His life is far more exciting than mine.
Posted by: Joules at April 05, 2007 02:42 PM (u4CYb)
March 01, 2007
Travel Tips 2.0
I thought they had a phone in the john, but when I picked it up it blew hot air at me.
Posted by: annika at
08:51 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Are you sure..cuz it couldda been a message from Hillary!
Posted by: jimi at March 01, 2007 09:23 AM (cV7Xy)
2
How'd you manage to get it off the wall??
Wait... don't answer that.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at March 01, 2007 10:35 AM (xHyDY)
3
They used to have one in there, but women kept dropping it in the toilet. Do you know a woman who hasn't dropped her phone in a toilet yet?
Posted by: Casca at March 01, 2007 01:56 PM (Y7t14)
4
Awesome! A new dimension to phone sex! >:-)
Posted by: Radical Redneck at March 01, 2007 06:52 PM (sX7GP)
January 08, 2007
Epiphany Epiphany
This weekend I realized something, and I wanted to share it with you. Despite being bombarded with dire warnings from every corner, I've never felt afraid about global warming. Not even once since all the hysteria began. Al Gore needs to work harder.
Posted by: annika at
09:45 AM
| Comments (36)
| Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The bumper stickers tell me "If you're not mad, you're not paying attention."
And the logic of bumper stickers is infallible.
Posted by: Mark at January 08, 2007 11:32 AM (krump)
2
The number of errors in Gore's movie should have embarrassed his supporters. However, despite numerous people documenting the errors, the MSM was virtually silent, quoting only those who supported Gore's political (as opposed to scientific) agenda.
I'm not the least bit worried either. In another 20 years, Time Magazine (or some other Left-wing rag) is going to revert back to the global cooling theory, and the enviro-whackos are going to worry about the next Ice Age. The enviornmental movement is really just an anti-capitalist movement, and so when fascination with global warming goes away, they will find something else.
Posted by: blu at January 08, 2007 11:58 AM (LtzGE)
3
It must suck to be afraid of every gawd damn thing.
Posted by: Casca at January 08, 2007 12:40 PM (Y7t14)
4
I am much more frightened of global suckage. If hollywood starts sucking any more the whole USA will be pulled into caleefornia.
Posted by: kyle8 at January 08, 2007 03:04 PM (9B/3g)
5
It's in the 50's in Syracuse in January. I've used the snow blower once this winter.
If this is global warming, bring it on!
Posted by: MarkD at January 08, 2007 03:46 PM (VyQ5A)
6
Yeah, me neither. It reminds me of so many fads that have come and gone. People are such sheep. Baaa! Give me a research grant to study global warming.
Posted by: Joules at January 08, 2007 04:36 PM (u4CYb)
7
global warming is a leftwing scam designed to give them an excuse to raise taxes, and bash capitalists and industry. if they don't scare us them they can't raise taxes - selectively, on things and people they don't like.
funny how life spans have gone way up since the industrial age, and prosperity has increased too. that is for everyone in the industrialized world.
if industrialization was so bad for our health and the globe then we'd a seen worse things by now.
if we really want the lives of the poor people in the third world to improve we need to build them some big factories and powerplants.
Posted by: reliapundit at January 08, 2007 09:14 PM (xyulJ)
8
So many conspiracy theorists in one blog!
Yes, there are a handful of scientists, most of whom have taken money from fossil fuel companies, who remain somewhat skeptical, though as the years go by, they've backpedaled considerably.
There will always be those who say science is wrong, and will pick one or two examples to 'prove' why. This has been going on ever since the days of Colombus and Galileo.
For those who get their science news from Fox or science fiction writers and think there is still a healthy debate in the scientific community, simply read the scientific opinion on climate change, then some of the science itself. I'd be glad to have someone critique that information from other than a polemicist's stance.
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 06:04 AM (h7Ciu)
9
The science is by no means clear, and scientists are divided on the issue. Most are independent of fossil fuel support. The historical temperature data you reference are for 2,000 years, and the global temperature swings occur on a roughly 12,000 year cycle. We are actually overdue for an ice age, and if global warming can prevent that, I am for it. During the last ice age the ice pack was one mile thick in North Carolina.
Posted by: Joints at January 09, 2007 07:32 AM (Dh/a/)
10
> The science is by no means clear, and scientists are divided on the issue. Most are independent of fossil fuel support.
I invite you to provide support for the above statements. Note that the position taken by Science Academies of the G8, China, India, and several dozen others are in conflict with your position.
I have heard denialists say that "this warming is to be expected because we are just now coming out of an ice age", which conflicts with your position as well. At what point in time did you expect the next ice age to start, if human-induced warming was not a factor? What basis of support do you have for that position?
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 08:06 AM (h7Ciu)
11
Yes, there is a rise in the global temperature. What we disagree about is whether we are the cause of it or not.
What I love is when someone says, "Show me proof, but I'll not accept anything from these sources." Automatically ruling out a source because it doesn't fit into your world view, in this case it's Fox News, is one of the most immature arguments that anyone can make.
Just because something is the prevailing opinion (humans cause global warming) doesn't mean it is correct. Just as the fact that the prevailing scientific opinion at varying times has been that the earth was flat, or that the sun revolved around the earth.
The earth has gone through many periods of warming and cooling, and humans weren't around for the vast majority of it. Most of the earth has been covered by water at one time or another, and yet there weren't any evil CFCs around to cause the melting of the ice caps.
We have recorded data for what, 100-150 years worth of temperature readings? And how old is the earth?
Those of us who resist regulation like the Kyoto protocol, which does all it can to harm industrialized nations while exempting emerging countries, see this as a typical double standard. If global warming is THE threat of our lifetime, then no one should be exempt. But, like most feel good, leftists causes, this is more about punishing success.
Posted by: Frank at January 09, 2007 09:19 AM (YHZAl)
12
Frank wrote:
>What I love is when someone says, "Show me proof, but I'll not accept anything from these sources." Automatically ruling out a source because it doesn't fit into your world view, in this case it's Fox News, is one of the most immature arguments that anyone can make.
Fox News is not a science organization and is clearly heavily biased towards the few sceptics, so one would do well to seek other information sources. Saying so about Fox News is hardly immature, indeed I see it as quite the opposite. YMMV.
> Just because something is the prevailing opinion (humans cause global warming) doesn't mean it is correct. Just as the fact that the prevailing scientific opinion at varying times has been that the earth was flat, or that the sun revolved around the earth.
Actually, those where church positions that were being fought by scientists such as Galileo, Bruno, Copernicus, and others. The first two sacrificed themselves to stand on principle, and we are fortunate they did.
> The earth has gone through many periods of warming and cooling, and humans weren't around for the vast majority of it.
True.
> Most of the earth has been covered by water at one time or another, and yet there weren't any evil CFCs around to cause the melting of the ice caps.
True. However, CO2 has risen far above any prehistoric levels we've examined. Since 1878, CO2 has risen from 278 ppm to over 380 ppm now. Since CO2 is most significant steady-state greenhouse gas (GHG), one becomes less and less confident in skeptics who say that the current warming is 'natural' or simply an unexplainable abberation. But read the references I provided and critique them; everyone seems to be relying on their Fox News et al biased reporting.
> We have recorded data for what, 100-150 years worth of temperature readings? And how old is the earth?
There are many ways to determine the temperature, rainfall, and atmospheric composition of prior centuries and millenia through the paleoclimatologlical techniques of ice cores, geological sample analysis, and even tree rings, to name a few. Don't be afraid to read the links I provided above. And a large segment of the paleoclimate scientific community can be found at realclimate.org.
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 09:47 AM (h7Ciu)
13
Will,
Educating you would be a difficult challenge, even though I was a university professor for thirty years. Start with snowballearth.org, and then look up these references:
THE GREAT INFRA-CAMBRIAN GLACIATION. W. B. Harland and M. J. S. Rudwick in Scientific American, Vol. 211, No. 2, pages 28-36; February 1964.
THE EFFECT OF SOLAR RADIATION VARIATIONS ON THE CLIMATE OF THE EARTH. M. I. Budyko in Tellus, Vol. 21, pages 611-619, 1969.
ENERGY BALANCE CLIMATE MODELS. G. R. North, R. F. Cahalan and J. A. Coakley, Jr., in Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics, Vol. 19, No. 1, pages 91-121; February 1981.
MODELLING THE GEOCHEMICAL CARBON CYCLE. R. A. Berner and A. C. Lasaga in Scientific American, Vol. 236, No. 3, pages 74-81; March 1989.
LATE PROTEROZOIC LOW-LATITUDE GLOBAL GLACIATION: THE SNOWBALL EARTH. J. L. Kirschvink in The Proterozoic Biosphere, J. W. Schopf and C. Klein, editors, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pages 51-52, 1992.
THE NEOPROTEROZOIC CLIMATIC PARADOX: EQUATORIAL PALEOLATITUDE FOR MARINOAN GLACIATION NEAR SEA LEVEL IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA. P. W. Schmidt and G. E. Williams in Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Vol. 134, pages 107-124.
A NEOPROTEROZOIC SNOWBALL EARTH. P. F. Hoffman, A. J. Kaufman, G. P. Halverson and D. P. Schrag in Science, Vol. 281, pages 1342-1346; 28 August 1998.
Posted by: Joints at January 09, 2007 09:58 AM (Dh/a/)
14
Joints:
You've simply tossed out a wheelbarrow full of references (no online links) with no suggestion of even a thesis statement. I could also whip out hundreds of such links fairly easily, though no one here will start running around campuses tracking them down.
Since this technique of 'snowballing' references doesnt' work here, perhaps you like to provide a peer review of the article I mentioned above? Or demonstrate the fallicies several dozen Science Academies all committed (including the US and UK)? Or deconstruct the findings at realclimate.org? (Hint, they invite such in their article comment sections, which get quite long. You may be disappointed in the depth and soundness of the disagreement, however). Note that a large number of climatologists were skeptical throughout the 80s and into the 90s. Indeed, a good scientist should remain skeptical until presented with evidence to believe otherwise.
btw, what was your scientific specialty? The topic of your doctorate?
Posted by: wiil at January 09, 2007 10:58 AM (h7Ciu)
15
"What I love is when someone says, "Show me proof, but I'll not accept anything from these sources." Automatically ruling out a source because it doesn't fit into your world view, in this case it's Fox News, is one of the most immature arguments that anyone can make."
Get used to it: That's typical Will. He pretends he's erudite by quoting people who support his position and disqualifying anybody who disagrees. Don't bother with him; he's like debating a 6th grader. What's worse, he's not a subject matter expert in anything but name-dropping. Save your breath.
I'd rather debate, Straw. He at least has his own opinions.
Posted by: blu at January 09, 2007 11:18 AM (LtzGE)
16
From the snowballearth.org faq;
"Could a snowball earth occur again? The steadily increasing Solar luminosity and the present continental configuration conspire against it, but a large asteroidal or cometary impact could possibly trigger a snowball earth given the present cold ocean.
If a preponderance of tropical continents made the globe cold, the present geography with its enlarged boreal and subtropical land areas should have made it relatively warm. Before the ongoing intervention by our own species, this this was not the case."
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 11:19 AM (h7Ciu)
17
will: "there are a handful of scientists, most of whom have taken money from fossil fuel companies"
and the source for that is??
Posted by: annika at January 09, 2007 12:30 PM (zAOEU)
18
Sorry to intrude on Will's E-penis exhibition, but even if we all agreed with him that global warming must be stopped via our blank checks to the IRS or UN, you must remember that the implementation of the plan, to ultimately save the planet, is in the hands of government. The same type of government that loses nuclear secrets, billion dollar space probes, and my Hustler subscription in the mail. The government will manage Global Warming just about as well as they handle public education, the War on Drugs, and immigration.
You have no chance to survive. Make your time.
Posted by: Spanky at January 09, 2007 02:21 PM (wkyrW)
19
Annika, glad to oblige. I might note that I refer to those that are consistently skeptical now, and not ones from the 80's, 90's, or even early 00's. A good starting point for working one's way through this information is www.exxonsecrets.org. If anyone has trouble (requires java), then I'll type out some of the names. Pat Michaels, Larry Singer, Robert Ball, Sally Baliunas, etc are just some of the most consistent skeptics, and you'll find their connections at the above site. Pat Michaels was even caught a few months ago trolling for fossil fuel corporation slush. And Exxon alone has pumped at least $16 million to 43 groups to sow the seeds of doubt over climate change (because they don't have to win the argument, just cause doubt and inaction).
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 02:31 PM (h7Ciu)
20
Not to belabor the point, but those wanting to see an excellent overview of what both sides are saying would be well suited to go a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy">here. You'll see I spelled a couple of names wrong of the top of my head...
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 02:56 PM (h7Ciu)
21
Cool. As you know, I'm an agnostic on the issue. I wish i had as much time to research it as you do. I'm wondering though, if you have any references that might tend to show bias on the part of the Global Warming hawks. Or is it your belief that they are totally untainted by any motive other than scientific altruism?
Posted by: annika at January 09, 2007 02:59 PM (zAOEU)
22
"www.exxonsecrets.org" C'mon, Will.
Probably no agenda at this site.....it's a freakin Greenpeace site. Don't waste your time, people. These folks are nuts. They are also socialist luddites that HATE capitalism.
Yeah, when I want information, I always like to first go to the the most luny left-wing site I can find; or, alternativley, go see a Michael Moore film on the subject.
You make fun of Fox News news and then link to a Greenpeace site. LOL.
Hey, Will, do you think that Bush blew up the buildings on 9/11? Cuz, I can give you some really awesome links that "prove" that the government was responsible.
Posted by: blu at January 09, 2007 04:18 PM (LtzGE)
23
People like Will put their money on Paul Ehrlich back in the day:
http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/People/julian_simon.html
The global warming nuts come from the same stock.
Posted by: blu at January 09, 2007 04:21 PM (LtzGE)
24
You make fun of Fox News news and then link to a Greenpeace site. LOL.
What you say!! But..but he's an Independent, Blu!
Posted by: reagan80 at January 09, 2007 04:47 PM (wkyrW)
25
> if you have any references that might tend to show bias on the part of the Global Warming hawks.
The closest I could come would be some of the early models were rather simplistic, providing only very rough orders of magnitude. Undoubtably, there are many non-scientists that this subject evokes an emotional response rather than a rational one.
Blu said> Hey, Will, do you think that Bush blew up the buildings on 9/11?
No, he was reading a book about a goat at that time. Certain misguided policies and inaction in his administration certainly didn't help matters, though. And yes, the previous adminstration also made some missteps in this area.
Spanky said> You have no chance to survive. Make your time.
From the overview mentioned above;
The US National Academy of Sciences issued a report on this phenomenon in 2002, titled Abrupt Climate Change - Inevitable Surprises. [39] "It is important not to be fatalistic about the threats posed by abrupt climate change," it stated. "Societies have faced both gradual and abrupt climate changes for millennia and have learned to adapt through various mechanisms, such as moving indoors, developing irrigation for crops, and migrating away from inhospitable regions. Nevertheless, because climate change will likely continue in the coming decades, denying the likelihood or downplaying the relevance of past abrupt events could be costly."
Blu said> People like Will put their money on Paul Ehrlich back in the day:
http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/People/julian_simon.html
Actually, I didn't, though I'm not a Simonian either. Two quick items for you; speaking of Simon the cornucopian, in what month or quarter was the highest global oil production?
Posted by: will at January 09, 2007 05:11 PM (h7Ciu)
26
Not caring about Global Warming is one thing. But how come nobody seems to be worried about the evil donuts from the future that reprogrammed the stock market last year. That's the real scandal!
Posted by: annika at January 09, 2007 08:28 PM (1EshY)
27
Followup from yesterday, where the administration is admitting greenhouse gas warming;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901949.html?sub=AR
"People should be concerned about what we are doing to the climate," said Jay Lawrimore, chief of the climate monitoring branch of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Burning of fossil fuels is causing an increase in greenhouse gases, and there's a broad scientific consensus that is producing climate change."
The center said there are indications that the rate at which global temperatures are rising is speeding up.
-------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/science/10climate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
“A contributing factor to the unusually warm temperatures throughout 2006 also is the long-term warming trend, which has been linked to increases in greenhouse gases,” the release said, emphasizing that the relative contributions of El Niño and the human influence were not known.
A link between greenhouse gases and climate change was also made in a December news conference by Dirk Kempthorne, the secretary of the interior, as that agency proposed listing polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
Still, the climate agencyÂ’s shift in language came as a surprise to several public affairs officials there. They said they had become accustomed in recent years to having any mention of a link between climate trends and human activities played down or trimmed when drafts of documents went to the Commerce Department and the White House for approval.
James L. Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said the release reflected longstanding views within the administration.
“It’s helpful for them to describe what is a question in many people’s minds — what is the human factor, what is the El Niño factor,” Mr. Connaughton said of the NOAA release. “From our perspective, what was in the press release was a direct reflection of what the president and folks in his administration have been saying for some time.”
Mr. Bush has made two speeches on climate. He first expressly accepted that humans were contributing to global warming in a news conference in Denmark in July 2005 on the way to an economic summit in Scotland, saying, “Listen, I recognize that the surface of the Earth is warmer and that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans is contributing to the problem.”
But the governmentÂ’s scientific bureaucracy, where public affairs officials and scientists as recently as last year complained that findings pointing to climate dangers were being suppressed, has taken time to catch up.
“There’s been some sensitivity to the fact that some people have complained that NOAA and other parts of the government haven’t been as open as they would like them to have been on this,” said Jay Lawrimore, a climatologist at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., where the temperature trends are compiled. “Now NOAA is making an effort to be clearer on some of the influences.”
Mr. Lawrimore said there was no way to account for the trends, be they the melting of Arctic sea ice or the warming of winters, without including an influence from heat-trapping gases.
“Year after year as we continue to see warmer temperatures,” he said, “there are more and more converts convinced that it’s not just natural variability and not just something that’s going to return back to temperatures we saw 40 or 50 years ago — that in fact we are doing something to the climate.”
Posted by: will at January 10, 2007 08:53 PM (h7Ciu)
28
So, Will, if I get your drift after like a dozen posts, I take it you believe in the induced global warming theory?
Enough already! Go away. Seriously, you are like debating a spoiled, over-indulged 6 year-old. You couldn't possibly ever be wrong, could you?
Here's an idea: Go look in the mirror and argue with yourself. That way you could keep the argument going for as long as you like; and, God knows, you'd be totally enchanted with the person looking back at you.
Linking articles or lunatic left-wing blogs time and time again isn't going to convince anybody. You don't have any credibility. Anybody can cut'n'paste.
Another idea: develop an original thought.
Posted by: blu at January 11, 2007 10:35 AM (j8oa6)
29
Struck a nerve, did I blu? Or am I deconstructing a position you are desperately trying to cling to, regardless of the findings? I've been there before, and it indeed can be trying. I'm no longer a Republican as a consequence.
On the subject of whether or not GW is human induced, opinions from those other than climatologists (or climate-focused researchers in related fields) are meaningless. And yes, this means Rush, O'Reilly, your barber, etc. If you get your information from non-scientists on this matter, you're getting uniformed sound-bites at best, propaganda for the vast remainder.
I'm simply providing references and information. If you don't want to consider it, keep your eyes (and your mind) closed. Keep watching Fox News and believe that we are winning the war, we've found WMD (or will very soon), the dollar is strong, and Bush and the Republicans are more popular than ever.
Developing an original thought on this subject sounds attractive, but is frankly meaningless outside of the science. If you came up with such an original thought, we'd have to ask to see the scientific method and process by which you arrived at your conclusion. Pulling it out of a dark place, regardless of how rhetorically elegant it sounded, provides us with little more than fertilizer. I work with scientists and engineers every day, and know the importance of careful examination of data; if you have friends that are true scientists (i.e., who perform and publish research), talk to them about this subject; be prepared to listen.
What's next is the policy discussion; that's where the fun begins, and where "original thought" from anybody can be examined, weighted, and scored. Engineers are well suited to providing the impacts of various proposed alternatives, but it will take true leadership to implement measures to avoid economy-wrecking climate disaster for our descendents.
Posted by: will at January 11, 2007 02:44 PM (GzvlQ)
30
Oh, blu, if you can provide the errors that you understand to be in Gore's movie, I'll be glad to debate you. If you have it in you.
Posted by: will at January 11, 2007 02:46 PM (GzvlQ)
31
I know you couldn't let it go. The mirror awaits you. Go talk to the one you love most.
p.s. do you carry a picture of yourself in your wallet?
Posted by: blu at January 11, 2007 03:04 PM (j8oa6)
32
This is just one article I could find. And I declare that my "experts" are superior to yours. In fact, I dismiss all your experts because they don't agree with me. So, don't bother debating. (See, I'm using your technique: discredit any other sources as inferior. Man, this is fun. If a person uses Will debating technique, he is always right! Yea!!
---------------------------------------------
U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GOREÂ’S MOVIE
June 27, 2006
The June 27, 2006 Associated Press (AP) article titled
“Scientists OK Gore’s Movie for Accuracy” by Seth Borenstein
raises some serious questions about APÂ’s bias and methodology.
AP chose to ignore the scores of scientists who have harshly
criticized the science presented in former Vice President Al
Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”
In the interest of full disclosure, the AP should release the
names of the “more than 100 top climate researchers” they
attempted to contact to review “An Inconvenient Truth.” AP
should also name all 19 scientists who gave Gore “five stars
for accuracy.” AP claims 19 scientists viewed Gore’s movie,
but it only quotes five of them in its article. AP should also
release the names of the so-called scientific “skeptics” they
claim to have contacted.
The AP article quotes Robert Correll, the chairman of the
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment group. It appears from the
article that Correll has a personal relationship with Gore,
having viewed the film at a private screening at the
invitation of the former Vice President. In addition,
Correll’s reported links as an “affiliate” of a Washington,
D.C.-based consulting firm that provides “expert testimony” in
trials and his reported sponsorship by the left-leaning
Packard Foundation, were not disclosed by AP. See
http://www.junkscience.com/feb06.htm
The AP also chose to ignore GoreÂ’s reliance on the
now-discredited “hockey stick” by Dr. Michael Mann, which
claims that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere remained
relatively stable over 900 years, then spiked upward in the
20th century, and that the 1990Â’s were the warmest decade in
at least 1000 years. Last weekÂ’s National Academy of Sciences
report dispelled MannÂ’s often cited claims by reaffirming the
existence of both the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice
Age. See Senator Inhofe’s statement on the broken “Hockey
Stick.”
(http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697 )
GoreÂ’s claim that global warming is causing the snows of Mt.
Kilimanjaro to disappear has also been debunked by scientific
reports. For example, a 2004 study in the journal Nature makes
clear that Kilimanjaro is experiencing less snowfall because
thereÂ’s less moisture in the air due to deforestation around
Kilimanjaro.
Here is a sampling of the views of some of the scientific
critics of Gore:
Professor Bob Carter, of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at
James Cook University in Australia, on GoreÂ’s film:
"Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are
pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are
commanding public attention."
"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine
practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state
publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk
science." – Bob Carter as quoted in the Canadian Free Press,
June 12, 2006
Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of
Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:
“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore's approach is to
assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are
dynamic; they are always changing even without any external
forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad
enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.”
- Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street
Journal
GoreÂ’s film also cites a review of scientific literature by
the journal Science which claimed 100% consensus on global
warming, but Lindzen pointed out the study was flat out
incorrect. “…A study in the journal Science by the social scientist Nancy
Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web of Knowledge
Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the key words
"global climate change" produced 928 articles, all of whose
abstracts supported what she referred to as the consensus
view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser, checked her
procedure and found that only 913 of the 928 articles had
abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the remaining 913
explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus view. Several
actually opposed it.”- Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June
26, 2006 Wall Street Journal.
Roy Spencer, principal research scientist for the University
of Alabama in Huntsville, wrote an open letter to Gore
criticizing his presentation of climate science in the film:
“…Temperature measurements in the arctic suggest that it was
just as warm there in the 1930's...before most greenhouse gas
emissions. Don't you ever wonder whether sea ice
concentrations back then were low, too?”- Roy Spencer wrote in
a May 25, 2006 column.
Former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim
Ball reacted to GoreÂ’s claim that there has been a sharp
drop-off in the thickness of the Arctic ice cap since 1970.
"The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one
part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the
1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The
1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a
wholly different technology,” –Tim Ball said, according to the
Canadian Free Press.
# # # # #
Posted by: blu at January 11, 2007 03:25 PM (j8oa6)
33
Oh what the heck: one more.
Once again, I declare the "Will Rules of Debate," and, therefore, my experts are superior to all others...cuz I work with scientists and engineers afterall. And because of that I couldn't possibly be wrong.
----------------------
Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" opens around the country this week. In the film Gore pulls together evidence from every corner of the globe to convince us that climate change is happening fast, we are to blame, and if we don't act immediately, our Earth will be all but ruined. However, as you sit through the film, consider the following inconvenient truths:
(1) Near the beginning of the film, Gore pays respects to his Harvard mentor and inspiration, Dr. Roger Revelle. Gore praises Revelle for his discovery that atmospheric CO2 levels were rising and could potentially contribute to higher temperatures at a global scale. There is no mention of Revelle's article published in the early 1990s concluding that the science is "too uncertain to justify drastic action." (S.F. Singer, C. Starr, and R. Revelle, "What to do about Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap. Cosmos 1 (1993) 28-33.)
(2) Gore discusses glacial and snowpack retreats atop Kenya's Mt. Kilimanjaro, implying that human induced global warming is to blame. But Gore fails to mention that the snows of Kilimanjaro have been retreating for more than 100 years, largely due to declining atmospheric moisture, not global warming. Gore does not acknowledge the two major articles on the subject published in 2004 in the International Journal of Climatology and the Journal of Geophysical Research showing that modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro was initiated by a reduction in precipitation at the end of the nineteenth century and not by local or global warming.
(3) Many of Gore's conclusions are based on the "Hockey Stick" that shows near constant global temperatures for 1,000 years with a sharp increase in temperature from 1900 onward. The record Gore chooses in the film completely wipes out the Medieval Warm Period of 1,000 years ago and Little Ice Age that started 500 years ago and ended just over 100 years ago. There is evidence from throughout the world that these climate episodes existed, but on Gore's Hockey Stick, they become nothing more than insignificant fluctuations (Gore even jokes at one point about the Medieval Warm period).
(4) You will certainly not be surprised to see Katrina, other hurricanes, tornadoes, flash floods, and many types of severe weather events linked by Gore to global warming. However, if one took the time to read the downloadable "Summary for Policymakers" in the latest report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), one would learn that "No systematic changes in the frequency of tornadoes, thunder days, or hail events are evident in the limited areas analysed" and that "Changes globally in tropical and extra-tropical storm intensity and frequency are dominated by inter-decadal and multi-decadal variations, with no significant trends evident over the 20th century."
(5) Gore claims that sea level rise could drown the Pacific islands, Florida, major cities the world over, and the 9/11 Memorial in New York City. No mention is made of the fact that sea level has been rising at a rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past 8,000 years; the IPCC notes that "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected."
(6) Near the end of the film, we learn of ways the United States could reduce emissions of greenhouse gases back to the levels of 1970. OK. Assume the United States accomplishes this lofty goal, would we see any impact on climate? The well-known answer is no. China, India and many other countries are significantly increasing their emission levels, and global concentrations of CO2 may double this century no matter what we decide to do in the United States. Even if the Kyoto Protocol could be fully implemented to honor the opening of this movie, the globe would be spared no more than a few hundredths of a degree of warming.
Throughout the film Gore displays his passion for the global warming issue, and it is obvious that he has dedicated a substantial amount of time to learning about climate change and the greenhouse effect. This leads to an obvious question. The Kyoto Protocol was negotiated in December of 1997 giving the Clinton-Gore administration more than three years to present the Protocol to the United States Senate for ratification. Given Gore's position in the senate and his knowledge and passion for global warming, one must wonder why then Vice President Gore did not seize on what appears to have been an opportunity of a lifetime?
"An Inconvenient Truth" is billed as the scariest movie you'll ever see. It may well be, but that's in part because it is not the most accurate depiction of the state of global warming science. The enormous uncertainties surrounding the global warming issue are conveniently missing in "An Inconvenient Truth."
Dr. Robert C. Balling Jr. is a professor in the climatology program at Arizona State University, specializing in climate change and the greenhouse effect.
Posted by: blu at January 11, 2007 03:28 PM (j8oa6)
34
"I'm afraid your evidence is getting worse as we go along."
Are you kidding me? Will, you are so utterly predictable. You did what you always do (and I'm certain everybody reading this thread expected): Insist that you're experts are better than the person with whom you are debating. You also employed your typical trick of attacking the person/scientist if you don't like their viewpoint. And while insisting their opinions are wrong, you never actually prove them wrong.
Any serious person reading your response is going to do what I did: laugh. You didn't disprove anything. You simply did what you always do: Insist your opinions and your experts are better.
Now, seriously, go away. Your mirror is calling.
p.s. The list of those who think the “hockey stick” theory is crap is long and distinguished. As usual, you're excellent debate technique amounted to "that's not true cuz I say."
p.p.s. Don't bother responding; I just wanted to see how long your undeniable ego would keep you posting. As expected, you reacted in the exact manner all that have read you on this site would have expected.
Posted by: blu at January 11, 2007 08:25 PM (IYDwv)
35
Breaking news, blu;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16593606/
> p.s. The list of those who think the “hockey stick” theory is crap is long and distinguished.
Oh? Please list them and we will examine your claim.
Posted by: will at January 12, 2007 09:22 AM (h7Ciu)
36
> p.s. do you carry a picture of yourself in your wallet?
Actually, I do. I really do. And so do you. It's called a driver's license.
Posted by: will at January 12, 2007 06:07 PM (h7Ciu)
January 05, 2007
Happy News
Cinnamon Dolce latte has returned to Starbucks!
OMG!
Posted by: annika at
10:36 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.
1
My wife often drags me into that yuppy scumhole and I have found that their hot chocolate is actually pretty good, and much cheaper than the coffee.
Posted by: kyle8 at January 05, 2007 03:11 PM (OyZ8T)
2
Yes, it is and so is the more expensive special chocolate drink that has a somewhat pompous name I can't remember.
Posted by: Joules at January 05, 2007 09:14 PM (u4CYb)
3
No doubt they remembered that cinnamon is an aid in fighting many ailments. Diabedes-cholesterol-mental illness(as when you're crazy for a Cinnamon Dolce Latte)
Posted by: JMcD at January 06, 2007 06:34 AM (KpoGU)
December 30, 2006
Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid
It is a semi well known fact that the number of Elvis impersonators in the world has increased exponentially since the singer's death in 1977. But how many of you know just how pronounced and dangerous the trend is?
According to the San Francisco Chronicle
When Elvis Presley died in 1977, there were an estimated 37 Elvis impersonators in the world. By 1993, there were 48,000 Elvis impersonators, an exponential increase. Extrapolating from this, by 2010 there will be 2.5 billion Elvis impersonators. The population of the world will be 7.5 billion by 2010. Every 3rd person will be an Elvis impersonator by 2010.That's one third of the Earth's total population, or 22,500,000,000 people. I don't know about you, but I'm not sure I want to be an Elvis impersonator.
To be sure, not all of the finest workings of global population science is yet fully understood to the finest grain. However, all of the basics are absolutely clear. The Elvis impersonator crisis is real, humans are causing the problem, and the solutions are available to us now. It is not too late to avoid the worst. All that is needed is the political will to act.
h/t Some Words To Not.
Posted by: annika at
11:54 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The UN will dictate to the world that anyone who has a party has to hire an Elvis impersonator.
Posted by: Jake at December 30, 2006 12:28 PM (V6rxT)
2
I say sell Elvis Impersonator futures now, and hedge against the impending surplus!
Posted by: Casca at December 30, 2006 12:33 PM (2gORp)
3
Chronicle: ...by 2010 there will be 2.5 billion Elvis impersonators. The population of the world will be 7.5 billion by 2010. Every 3rd person will be an Elvis impersonator by 2010.
Annika: That's one third of the Earth's total population, or 22,500,000,000 people.
Unless I'm misreading something, I think an extra "2" snuck in there, dude.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at December 30, 2006 11:50 PM (1PcL3)
4
Ya know....By the time Elvis died,Elvis was an Elvis impersonator.
Posted by: JMcD at December 31, 2006 03:33 AM (KpoGU)
5
LOL, so true.
Posted by: Casca at December 31, 2006 10:08 PM (2gORp)
6
But WHY? Isn't there anyone else worth impersonating?
Posted by: Joules at January 02, 2007 12:03 PM (u4CYb)
December 21, 2006
Busy Girl
I checked out the Miss Nevada photos, and all I can say is she was working overtime. I can't believe she managed to do all that stuff in one night. She must have been exhausted afterwards. Listen, I had some wild times when I was her age, but dang gurl. Is there anyone in that room she didn't get funky on?
Posted by: annika at
07:22 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Miss Nevada was simply doing what she could for her fellow creatures, for as Dickens said:
"Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. "Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"
Merry Christmas, A.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at December 22, 2006 02:40 AM (1PcL3)
2
I found the pictures without that dumbass red star blocking them!
THIS is why I buy lots of alcohol stocks - fringe bennies!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at December 22, 2006 08:13 AM (67L5h)
3
Annika sings us Christmas carols!
Thanks Annie!
Posted by: Radical Redneck at December 22, 2006 08:30 AM (67L5h)
4
Damn! That girl needs to brush her tongue! A coated tongue is NOT attractive. Are you sure she's not Miss Halitosis? And, how did she win anything without a boobjob?
Posted by: Casca at December 22, 2006 08:42 AM (Y7t14)
5
Do you think she's listening to her dad now?
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at December 22, 2006 10:06 AM (1PcL3)
6
Thank God for drunk sluts.
Posted by: kyle8 at December 22, 2006 04:09 PM (46q4B)
7
It was clear that she was just clowning arounnd; that is obviously not serious sex.
What kind of a pervert would put that on the net and ruin her life? Could only be a jealous lover...
Posted by: shelly at December 23, 2006 03:52 AM (SLFj+)
8
She was SEVENTEEN when those were taken?! Dang. I guess I went to the wrong parties in high school.
Posted by: Matt at December 28, 2006 07:26 AM (10G2T)
9
Amazing that in the age of web cams, phone cams, and the internet, people still think it's safe to behave like a jackass in public.
Posted by: Mark at December 29, 2006 12:36 PM (/c6lU)
December 02, 2006
Big Hair Video of the Day
Victor here, still wired from watching my beloved Caps roll over one of the top two teams in hockey. Heckuva game and I'm not gonna be able to sleep for a couple of hours. I mean, it's 1:15 in the AM and I was going to go to work in about five hours, but not no more!
Instead, I'll clutter up annika's blog with a big hair video. I give you...The Flirts!
annika will soon begin to regret giving me posting rights.
Posted by: Victor at
11:15 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Many others already do.
Posted by: Casca at December 02, 2006 11:28 PM (2gORp)
2
wow, that is cheesy. love the outfits! did everybody try to look like sheena easton in the 80's?
Posted by: annika at December 02, 2006 11:43 PM (oantJ)
3
When they first walked out, I thought the one on the right looked like a young, blonde Margaret Thatcher.
Anyway, here's one of the few 80's music videos I remember seeing back when I was a pre-schooler: Genesis - "Land of Confusion".
Those puppets freaked my ass out back then, but, for a video with an anti-Reagan message, it had the opposite effect on me as a kid.
Posted by: reagan80 at December 03, 2006 07:05 AM (wkyrW)
4
Its so funny to see old anti-Reagan stuff from the 80's now that we know who was right!!!
Posted by: annika at December 03, 2006 09:59 AM (oantJ)
5
Yes indeed, Annika. The first RoboCop movie is another amusing example of satire containing obsolete prophecies about the "dark legacy" of the Reagan administration.
Skippy once noted:"At several points, Gorbachev had higher approval ratings in the United States than did President Ronald Reagan.
The above paragraph should be a clear demonstration that people didn't just go stupid in the last six years, like you might think."
Posted by: reagan80 at December 03, 2006 04:28 PM (wkyrW)
December 01, 2006
Fiji Coup Update
Fiji's military commander, Frank Bananarama, has called on the Prime Minister and other members of the country's government to come out of hiding.
Fiji's ousted Prime Minister charted a plane yesterday and travelled with his family to an undisclosed location on the island of Venus Levu, when it appeared a coup was about to take place.
Bananarama said ministers will not be hurt in any way, during what he called a clean-up of the government by the military. He cautioned any who might oppose him that the government was now fully under his control. "We got it, yeah baby we got it," he added.
Posted by: annika at
08:37 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.
1
LMAO, Love IT, but honey haven't we talked about posting when you're stoned?
Posted by: Casca at December 01, 2006 08:46 PM (2gORp)
2
oh come on, that was such a totally obvious pun and somebody had to make it!
Posted by: annika at December 01, 2006 08:49 PM (oantJ)
3
The blonde Bananaramette always looked scary to me. Makes "Scary" Spice look like a Care Bear.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at December 01, 2006 11:45 PM (/TGZb)
4
That's the first time that I've ever seen what the members of Bananarama looked like.
I wonder if they ever had a tour dubbed Banana Rammin'?
Posted by: reagan80 at December 02, 2006 10:59 AM (wkyrW)
5
ahh... 80's big hair. I remember it well. Pray God it doesn't come back in style.
Posted by: annika at December 02, 2006 01:10 PM (oantJ)
6
I, for one, loved the Big Hair.
Posted by: Victor at December 02, 2006 02:28 PM (l+W8Z)
7
I did that dance routine as a cheerleader in high school. Only we did it better!
Posted by: annika at December 02, 2006 09:50 PM (oantJ)
8
So staging a coup is now funny?
Posted by: davod at December 03, 2006 03:27 PM (AM62A)
November 16, 2006
Visitor Mail
Blu wrote me to suggest that I mention the passing of Thomas Friedman, which I have now done.
Correction: Make that Milton. Told you econ was not my subject.
Posted by: annika at
02:01 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I think he had a great life.
Posted by: Scof at November 16, 2006 02:27 PM (a3fqn)
2
Were that it was Thomas vice Milton. If William F. Buckley is the godfather of modern american conservatism, Milton Friedman is the godfather of conservative economic thought in the last half of the 20th Century. God bless the old boy, and all the others of the Chicago school.
Posted by: Casca at November 16, 2006 03:34 PM (2gORp)
3
I second that sentiment, Casca. Well said.
Thanks Annie. Milton Friedman will be studied and discussed long after his death - truly a great visionary and lover of freedom.
Posted by: blu at November 16, 2006 05:49 PM (w2RJn)
4
Friedman believed in Freedom. In his eloquent writings I developed my own Ideas of the morality of freedom. Alas, too many people reject it. It is the best way ever shown to increase human happiness, and economic growth.
But in order to embrace freedom, you must give up two things which are so dear to most people. 1) evading personal responsibility, and 2) imposing your (collective) will upon others.
Even many of the conservatives who are right now praising Dr. Friedman do not believe in what he taught.
Posted by: kyle8 at November 17, 2006 04:11 AM (H4gAp)
August 04, 2006
Observations From The Cellphone #94
[part of a continuing series]
Panda Express is a phenomenon whose longevity, like that of rock & roll or the computer, seems unjustified by its present state of quality.
Posted by: annika at
02:45 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.
August 03, 2006
Question #249
[in a continuing series]
Am I the only one who thinks it's ironic that even though he's dictator of the country with the GREATEST HEALTHCARE SYSTEM IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND, Fidel Castro is still going to die?
Posted by: annika at
06:56 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The sooner he makes his trip to hell to be with Che, Stalin, and Mao the better. What a worthless piece of human debris.
Posted by: Blu at August 03, 2006 08:16 AM (LXOfu)
2
p.s. I love the photos. This is what the Left wants to import to America. Can I have "free" healthcare....pretty please!!!!!
Posted by: Blu at August 03, 2006 10:12 AM (j8oa6)
3
Perhaps I'll get sent to re-education camp for saying this, but Mary Baker Eddy died also.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at August 04, 2006 05:18 PM (xJ+oA)
4
Annika,
a letter to the WP from the wife of someone I am faintly aquainted with:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/04/AR2006080401373.html
Posted by: Strawman at August 09, 2006 01:51 PM (G2Zzw)
5
I love the Cuba's poor "are much better off" than are ours. What a load of crap. There is zero data to prove that absurd claim. How ridiculous. It's about as silly as their "free" healthcare.
This letter was written by a Leftist with Communist sympathies. It's worthless, Straw. Your willingness to embrace the most vile ideology to ever infect mankind is a sick joke.
Nobody on this site is dumb enough to fall for this inane crap. The day Castro dies will be a great day for humanity. May he rest along side his goon Che in Hell where he belongs.
Posted by: Blu at August 10, 2006 01:45 PM (j8oa6)
June 21, 2006
Useless June 21 Blogging
Dang, this was a long day.
Posted by: annika at
08:49 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Well, things will be better tomorrow, Annie: It's my birthday.....which means I have a perfect excuse to hang with my peeps and drink way too much :-)
Posted by: blu at June 21, 2006 09:10 PM (93GuQ)
2
p.s. So feel free to have a drink or two and join the party remote.
Posted by: blu at June 21, 2006 09:11 PM (93GuQ)
3
(I got the joke, even if nobody else did. Good one, Annika!)
Posted by: Jim Treacher at June 22, 2006 10:11 AM (fPhp8)
4
Sh*t, how did I miss that.....
Excellent catch Jim. You are a quicker wit than I.
Posted by: blu at June 22, 2006 01:01 PM (j8oa6)
5
I hate to tell ya blu, but everyone got the joke. It's just that Jim was proud of his accomplishment.
Posted by: Casca at June 22, 2006 03:10 PM (2gORp)
May 31, 2006
Water News
I got an idea, fill the bucket with confetti!
Posted by: annika at
01:40 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.
<< Page 1 of 5 >>
142kb generated in CPU 0.0589, elapsed 0.1114 seconds.
78 queries taking 0.0806 seconds, 339 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
78 queries taking 0.0806 seconds, 339 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
