Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Anthropogenic …

: “Of or having it’s origins in or by man”

:  “Of, relating to, or resulting from the influence of human beings on nature”

In common usage these days it is almost exclusively related to man’s impact on the planet and the biosphere, the altar of the Gaia worshipers. (as in anthropogenic pollutants) Of course we all “know” that in Greek mythology, Gaia, from Ancient Greek (Γαῖα, a poetical form of Γῆ Gē, Ge, “land” or “earth”); also spelled Gaea, was the personification of the Earth and one of the Greek primordial deities (would that be God?).

Gaia was the great mother of all: the primal Greek Mother Goddess (all very feminist and PC don’tcha know?); creator and giver of birth to the Earth and all the Universe; the heavenly gods, the Titans, and the Giants were born to her. The gods reigning over their classical pantheon were born from her union with Uranus (the sky), while the sea-gods were born from her union with Pontus (the sea). Her equivalent in the Roman pantheon was Terra, (the “earth” half of the “Tellus-Luna” twin planet).

I am, not surprisingly, quite skeptical of “worshipers” of ancient mythological figures, having “Wiccans” in the extended family and a fair bit of up close and personal experience with other “deeply spiritua nature worshipers”. I have discovered through experience that all those I have met are “into” “spirituality” because it’s “cool” and even more important,  “Not Christian!”  As I once read or heard somewhere,  “Christianity has never been tried and found wanting, it has been tried and found hard”.  Being a “deeply spiritual” “nature worshiper” is way easier in the short run, just another variation on self worship which is always easy until we hit the wall and discover “we are not God”.

So is it easier to blow God off by claiming a different god or by denying that there is a god because there is no “scientific” proof, no material evidence to be manipulated in support of the “god” hypothesis”?  Obviously at the fundamental level, we all simply manipulate pre-existing material whether it is the materiel of creation or something we imagined in our created mind.  No “creature” can “create” anything.  Even after about 100,000 years we still have not “created” anything. We humans are simply a very primitive version of a manipulator. A good example of a sophisticated modern “manipulator” is pictured below.

Manipulator-STD-M100_WITH_END-EFFECTORThe good folks who designed and built this “manipulator” simply (or nor so simply)  manipulated pre-existing materials and ideas to produce a new object. I guarantee you they have a solid appreciation of the difference between “settled science” and real science.

Any claim to or invocation of  “settled science” is simply ignorant bravado, like Al Gore blathering on about “creating” the internet, and the “settled science” about climate change, as the high priests of the temple of man now prefer to call it. Just how much are those Carbon credits worth to your favorite carbon industry Al?

Inconvenient or not, settled Science is – simply – not – science.  By definition, if it is “settled” it is not science, and if it is “science” it is not settled. There are no other sides to the coin no matter what the religious adherents to “settled science” theory hold to be “truth.

As mentioned in a previous post, “it’s what you don’t know you don’t know” that bites you in the ass every time.  All the folks who appeal to “settled science” as the foundation platform for their particular point of view are in a binary reality.

They are either ignorant and while being sincere in their “beliefs” are just plain sincerely wrong. Or, they know what is wrong with their position, but reality doesn’t fit their desires so they just plain lie about reality because they believe they are much smarter than their audience and their listeners will never know the difference – another faith based position just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

For example, the “theory” of evolution gives a plausible explanation for the development of certain traits in certain creatures but nowhere, anywhere or any-when has it ever lead to any “proof” that “there is no God”.  It is just a somewhat useful “theory” that explains some of the things we perceive in “creation”.  The theorist Darwin never made the claim that his theory in any way disproved the existence of God.  He was a believer in God. There is nothing in the “Theory” of evolution that precludes God actually using evolution as one of His tools.

The “theory” of evolution is not “settled science”  that is, its not fact, it is still “science”. However, that “unproven” part of the “Theory of Evolution hasn’t stopped legions of sincere believers who are wrong, and other legions liars who think their audience is “dumb as sack of hammers” from beating the “there is no God” drum, “because of evolution”, to anyone who will listen, all the while acting in real life before all the votes are in, as if there is no God, as if they can somehow remake the universe in THEIR own likeness through the sheer power of their deviant desires.

One of the best recent examples of the power of people to “rush to judgement” because they so desperately want a particular dream to be true, was the “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN” headline in 1948. The 1948 presidential election campaign was a hard fight for Truman. By traveling thousands of miles, Harry Truman talked and spoke to many people. He spoke out his feelings on the issues rather than double talk his way out of giving a direct answer. The people that listened to him started the now famous phrase “Give ’em Hell, Harry”.

Harry Truman said he was just telling the truth. More and more people began to come out to listen to his speeches. The famous “whistle stop” campaign drew the farmers and small town people (the grey tribe) out by the thousands. When Truman went to bed November 2, he was losing the election (according to the pink tribe). Upon arising the next morning he, of course, learned he had won. He traveled to Washington, D.C. that day by train. On a short stop in St. Louis, Truman was presented with one of the “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN” papers while on the back platform of the train. It was at this moment that the now famous photo of Truman holding up the paper was taken. When asked to comment, Truman said “This is for the books.”

This little vignette perfectly illustrates the “It’s what you don’t know that you don’t know that bites your ass” truism. None of these “settled Science folks actually know what they don’t know, they are just hoping for a miracle, but of course without God, there are no miracles. It’s just a matter of time before reality catches up with them.  Of course when it does, their audience is dumber than a sack of hammers and they can just change their story. Right Mr. Premier? Health Districts are not the same as Health Regions, right? But the only thing you can say for certain is that they are spelled different.

Cheers

Joe

CSR

 

 

 

Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Uncategorized

Anthropogenic Global Warming …

I was sitting out on my roof this morning eating my breakfast of a four egg bacon cheese omelet and strong full caff espresso roast coffee and thinking about the day. Sunny, +14 degrees Celsius, and a gentle “warm” breeze from the south. I have no back yard since my building covers the entire lot but I do have about 3000 square feet of flat roof which makes a great lounge or patio (remember patios?).  The weather guys tell me that this is “unseasonal” for mid March in the prairies.

This perennial phenomenon of temperature fluctuation, even in the same year, always prompts chatter about “global warming” even though no one seems to talk much about it when it is -20.  And I understand the concept of global warming, or climate change as the progressives now call it since it has been conclusively demonstrated that all their models are actually inconclusive in the extreme when they posit the “warming” part, and especialy the “man made” part.

Just so we are all clear, I am not disputing the existence of climate change in any way. We have had climate change on this planet pretty much as long as there has been a climate. It probably started shortly after the planet developed an atmosphere. What turns my crank is when I am being directed to change my ways and required to pay extra taxes and costs because some long haired wanker in academia or some suite in a corner office in the legislature has decided he or she can get more resources for his or her pet project if only we can force other people to pay for it. (see endless pontification and drivel on carbon taxes and caps available anywhere progressives leave their scat).

The term “anthropogenic” means of, relating to, or involving the impact of humans on nature. Because human practices are the source of many water-quality contaminants in the ecosystem everywhere that man resides in any number,  they must be described as an integral part of the environmental setting. Agricultural runoff, urban runoff, point discharges of municipal and industrial wastes, mine drainage, septic-system effluent, landfill leachate, and contaminated atmospheric deposition are all sources of anthropogenic contamination. These sources are directly related to population density, land cover and land use, water use, and waste disposal in our environment. All of this is empirical fact and proven to be so.

The “magical mile” is the religious leap to changing the global climate by crapping in our own back yard. Make no mistake about it, this sort of thinking is only possible when one abandons all pretense of the position being “scientifically” based and accepts received wisdom along with whatever agenda comes along with this “wisdom” from the chosen wise men or women. One of my favorite techniques for discussion is to throw in percentages to give weight to whatever position I have adopted for the nonce. So in that vein I suggest that perhaps 95% of all global warming religious do not and have never understood the concept of “scientific research” as it applies to reality.

Most popular “climate science” starts out with a hypothesis which favours the progressive socioeconomic agenda and then rapidly degenerates into pseudo-scientific baffle-gab and back slapping amongst the anointed. If anyone points out that the emperor is naked they are belittled, denigrated mocked and otherwise marginalized and if that doesn’t work they are slandered, defamed, expelled, screamed down, or just plain killed (accidentally of course). You don’t believe that anyone was ever killed in an academic or governmental pogrom?  You are so innocent. Read history. Our society has been doing exactly this for thousands of years.

I would like to point out an interesting website for any readers who have not already left because of my apostasy in the hopes that they might find some other points of view than the whole global warming mythology currently worshipped by the progressive nazis of academia and the MSM.

http://isthereglobalcooling.com/about_the_author

and

http://isthereglobalcooling.com/skepticism

There you will find things like the following  two paragraphs :

***

on Sept 22, 2008, I learned that NASA was announcing the findings from the satellite Ulysses after its 18 year voyage studying the Sun. The Ulysses passed the Sun three times. The first pass was during a solar minimum (a period of lower activity). The second pass of the Sun was during a solar maximum and the third pass during a less active period similar to the first pass (solar cycle 23).  They noticed large differences between the two minimums, that on the third pass the Sun was emitting much less energy than the first pass, and the lowest amount of solar energy ever recorded (since the beginning of modern measurement with the advent of the space program). This only confirms my suspicion that the Sun is the primary driver of the world’s temperatures and not mankind. This explains the warming of the 1980’s and 1990’s and for the last sixteen years when global temperatures have not been increasing.

I have found that natural forces, and not CO2, are the primary drivers of our global climate. Solar activity, ocean cycles (PDO and AMO), as well as volcanic activity have the largest impact, by far, on temperatures. Never in geological history has CO2 been a driver of the climate. I was surprised to learn that in 80% of the last 600,000,000 years, CO2 levels were higher than today. They were 12 times higher in the Dinosaur Period. There were also three ice ages with more CO2 than today, one had fifteen times more!

***

and there’s plenty more to read for any one who is looking for truth and hasn’t already drunk the koolaid.

Anyway, it’s really nice on my roof right now and to really push my rude question: “Even if everything the global warming fanatics are pushing were absolutely true why the hell would we want to stop it?  ARE THEY NUTS?  This is Canada!  6 months of winter and 6 months of bad weather!  Global Warming!  WOOHOO!!! Bring it on. If anyone is bothered by it being too hot or the sea level rising somewhere else bring them here. In case you didn’t notice we have lots of space and a very nice place to live where the government guarantees you a comfortable life until they decide to make you “die with dignity” but what the hey, we all die sometime, why not when some suit decides they can’t afford to support you any more.

Cheers

Joe

CSR

 

 

 

Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

 

 

Standard