I am still thinking about how to write a couple of posts on the Reincarnation of our Lord and the Real Presence in the Eucharist. Obviously I would have to confine myself to what I believe and why I have come to believe it or the post would never end. There has been a lot of writing and debate on these items of faith over the centuries.
Pope Leo XIII
I may not actually get to writing anything if I keep on finding more and more interest in the extent Magisterium and various theological opinions from many faith streams. There are whole libraries worth of content out there worthy of consideration.
For example, I never thought of Pope Leo XIII as a Liberal but it seems, from reading old articles and opinion pieces that he might actually be said to be the “father or sponsor” of the heterodox Modernist heresy in the current Catholic hierarchy. Who Knew … Leo XIII as a Liberal … hmmm.
On other fronts I subscribe to a Blog site written by a very interesting Doctor, Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, who writes mostly on Cardiac topics but sometimes wanders off into other very interesting areas and I am inspired to link to his latest blog post and also to quote largely from his latest and from a couple of others.
I share his concern for the radical attempts on the part of many established authorities to vilify, demean and silence anyone, literally by any means possible, who dares to disagree with them.
Dr Malcolm Kendrick
I have mentioned Kim Jong-un in a few posts but it is apparent that there are literally thousands of little “Kim Jong-un” fan boys and fan girls out there on the loose and many of them are in control of many of our various “Authorities”, Societies, Governing Bodies, Associations, and so on. These are the Illuminati who control or try to control what is allowed to transpire in our polite society, and woe to all those who fail to toe the line and make the appropriate obeisances to those authorities.
These days we find ourselves living in a culture and society where keeping control is more important than truth, than reality. Over decades I have come to believe that a truth can always be proven, a truth can be defended, even against a vigorous attack. But a lie will not hold up to scrutiny.
And anyone who refuses to allow vigorous debate is not on the side of truth. It is better to fight and re-fight the battle over truth, rather than let a single lie – or mis-truth – go unchallenged. Reality is somewhat different from social media memes despite the aims and desires of authority figures everywhere.
Everything we “know” to be true may be untrue tomorrow, our “assumptions” may be proven wrong at any moment. And when that happens we need to maintain the flexibility to adapt to a whole new world. If our culture fails to adapt, it will fail fatally and join the legions of failed nations, states, and cultures that fill the mass graves of history.
Unfortunately, even when the data support a hypothesis which goes against the currently accepted “truth” all right thinking people “know” that the accepted truth is the real truth and any different opinion or hypothesis is obviously wrong and the people who espouse that train of conjecture are obviously idiots who need their breathing problem fixed.
‘A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.’ Max Plank.
We assume that whatever we hear around the water cooler of at the coffee shop or amongst our “Friends” on Facebook is absolute truth, especially if it is a juicy tidbit about our neighbour or a competitor, unless it goes against what we already “Know”.
“Assume, as the saying goes, makes an ass out of you and me”. The assumptions you make, the assumptions you don’t think to question, will eventually get you into trouble. I think that just might be what is at the root of people expressing anger towards us because we are not angry about the same things they are angry about.
Here is a link to an interesting theory about oil as a “fossil” fuel, a non-renewable resource which we are using up too fast (“Peak Oil”?) and which is killing the planet (Global Warming?). Most of the proponents of the “anti-oil energy” religion don’t live anywhere with “winter” and also have disingenuously advocated “alternative” energy sources which invariably involve vast wealth transfers from taxpayers to their own interest groups.
However the unexamined premise has resulted in the proliferation of believers in regions where they would be dead in a week if their beliefs were ever put into practice. Such is the nature of humanity, we have a burning need to “belong” more than any need for our beliefs to show congruence with reality.
From the blog of Dr. Malcolm Kendrick: “For many years it was taught that bacteria could not live in the human stomach. It was too hostile, too acidic. So, when it was proposed that a bacterium (H. Pylori), living in the stomach, could be an important cause of stomach ulcers, the idea was pretty much dismissed out of hand.
Warren and Marshall eventually proved that the scientific consensus on this matter was utter nonsense. This despite being attacked viciously from all sides. They eventually won the Nobel prize for their work where they were specifically praised for battling on in the face of implacable hostility. It is clear that had Warren not been a cussed swine, they could easily have given up, worn down by the opposition.
Had Max Plank not decided to publish some wild and whacky papers in his journal ‘Physics’, from a patent clerk, it is perfectly possible we may never have heard of a certain Albert Einstein.”
Why does “authority” have such a resistance to truth?
For years now, in the course of business, I have remarked many times that many people, perhaps even most people, would rather die than change their lifestyle, their diet, even their mind. I don’t think this is overstating the case. And while it is a new understanding to me, this thought is not new:
“ ‘No man can be forced to be healthful, whether he will or not. In a free society, individuals must judge for themselves what information they choose to heed and what they ignore.’ (John Locke. (1632 – 1704) ‘A letter concerning Toleration’)
So onward … I have found the next 2 links uplifting and vindicating in the same sense as the old joke about peeing in a dark suit. I have been personally vilified and ridiculed for my questioning the current use of vaccines even by a family member in my extended family, dismissed as a “crazy vaxer”, but here are the links.
You can decide for yourselves whether we suffer from “worship of authority” or have a genuine belief in the “scientific method”.
So, imagine a universe where authority can be wrong. Sometimes, a person in authority can be mistaken. A person who believes a lie, and who repeats the lie, does not do so out of malicious intent! And yet, he is repeating a lie! Sometimes people and authorities believe things that are later proven to be untrue and they act on those things with a clear conscience because it’s “for our own good”. If you forced these folks to take a lie detector test they would pass because they actually do not know it is a lie.
There are books, books written as recently as a few years years ago, books you can still find in the library, which include untruths. Did those writers lie to you? No, they’d told the truth, as they’d known it. But future generations discovered that their concept of the truth had been very limited, and knowledge is still advancing. And that is just the mild form of misinformation.
Authority is also often more interested in maintaining itself than determining the truth. A person(s) who clings to his/her authority – which may or may not be based on a known lie – is unlikely to want to do anything to weaken it. This reminds me of Pournelle’s iron law of bureaucracy:
In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely.
He eventually restated it as:
…in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representatives who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.
Also reminded of Santayana’s “those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.” in the sense that the vaults of history are crammed full of “authorities” who viciously resisted any form of change when their beliefs were questioned, and in the end they turned out to be wrong, even dead wrong, but that didn’t stop them from making millions of people miserable, or even dead.
I think we are up against the same sort of situation now when dealing with our health care system, our government, our social programs, the “religion” of climate change and so on and so forth.
“Inner Thoughts” Rodrigo Rodriguez, from the album “Inner Thoughts” (2006)
Just a nice pleasant coffee break discussion …
I will bet this is probably way more than you feel like reading but I am going to run on anyway because I just feel like talking about things today. When I first wrote this it had been 11 days since my ankle surgery. It’s now been 30 days and things are looking much better … no more pain and stretching things out now.
Back in February I rated my constant pain level at about 4 out of 10 where 0 is no pain at all and 10 is all consuming pain such that you can’t think about anything else. Now I am mostly just “uncomfortable” and I am starting to exercise to get some flexibility and strength back into the joint.
“Your mileage may vary” as they used to say. “Danger Will Robinson!”, Engage!
What’s on my mind this morning is a mixture of irritation about the irrationality of the Global Warming crowd, and a Lenten awareness of personal mortality and our ultimate destination namely death, which destination rarely surfaces as a relevant topic amongst the chattering classes with their overwhelming concern with “fixing” the behaviour of everyone who disagrees with them by any means possible.
If you are still reading this, it is likely that you and I live in the real world and always have. So do the rest of those who I call friends, some of them for almost 50 years now, although many have also died and gone to their reward. Unfortunately that classification of “friend” excludes most of my family on both sides, both genetic and in-laws who have “drunk the KoolAide” and signed their names in blood to agree with what passes for “common sense” on Social Media these days. I still try to protect them or save them from the predictable results of their ill-considered decisions, and they are a GOD given invitation to practice good works with good will, with love instead of contempt.
I have to just hold my nose and play the nodding donkey whenever they try to tell me insane “truths” like the “Polar Vortex” is caused by Global Warming caused by Alberta’s coal fired electrical generation stations … of which we have 5 out of 24 in Canada and over 7000 worldwide, and we have to shut them all down to “save the planet”. Sigh. They all live in Ontario, which they apparently believe doesn’t use any carbon based energy from Alberta, though they have a few coal fired plants of their own but we won’t talk about that, eh?
Sigh. One cannot develop humility without going through humiliation. I have it on good Authority that that’s how you do it, so thank-you for the humiliation.
Carl Sagan, … Cosmos … Trust me, I’m smarter than you …
Idiocy and deviance in all it’s flavors seems to be thriving in the nice tolerant Canada we now live in. I got a short note about coal fired power the other day from a friend who is concerned about the thousands of layoffs we have had here in Alberta, in the last couple of years.
It is even now starting to reach deep down to the service companies, who are always the last to go tits up. I am going to include it here as food for thought but not as food for anger, because we have been through this all before.
I remember when all the usual suspects were assuring us that we were entering a new ice age and we were all going to die from starvation within 20 years … that was back in the 70’s.
I fondly remember Carl Sagan, and his Nuclear Winter and Cosmos, and not so fondly raise a questioning eyebrow at Paul R. Ehrlich et al. and millions dying of starvation in the U.S. by the 1990’s.
The Wikipedia Brights mostly agree with and worship Sagan and Ehrlich but they do have fairly comprehensive articles about their beliefs and their work so I cited them anyway. You can look at all that stuff and decide for yourselves whether population control lights your fires or not. The Chinese Communists imposed strict population control which has worked out rather problematically – again, the law of unintended consequences in action.
When that whole death by massive apocalyptic starvation didn’t pan out as a a good scare tactic they all switched over to Ehrlich’s other “big scary problem” beating the drum about global warming and pollution and the man made causes of that. Don’t believe me? I remember this, ’cause I was there! If you weren’t then here are some “Historic Notes“:
The Population Bomb is/was a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor of Biology and teacher, Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich (who was uncredited), in 1968.
It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth (why do they always decide that they have to kill off someone else to solve the problem?). Remember that fears of a “population explosion” were widespread in the 1950s and 60s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience.
The book has been criticized since its publishing for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions. More importantly, and tragically, the book gave a huge number of unqualified, untrained, ignorant, emotional, “feelings matter” coffee klatch pundits a sincere belief in the notion that they were a special enlightened Illuminati with authority to enforce their opinions on others by social media shaming and virtue signalling or by voting for every lunatic who promised to “save the planet” by shutting down the entire evil carbon based portion of our economy (as if somehow the rest of the economy could exist in isolation for longer than a few weeks). Yes Virginia, the sky IS falling, but it takes billions of years.
“Àki”, Rodrigo Rodriguez, from the album “Inner Thoughts” (2006)
I intentionally use the term coffee klatch. or coffee klatsch also kaf·fee·klatsch (kŏf′ē-klăch′, -kläch′, kô′fē-) that is a casual social gathering for coffee and conversation. [Partial translation of German Kaffeeklatsch : Kaffee, coffee + Klatsch, gossip; see klatch.] Up until recently no adult would make the mistake of considering any coffee klatch equivalent to serious scientific and mathematical research by knowledgeable people under controlled conditions, but that is what is now driving the show thanks to the mob stirred up in the 70’s and 80’s, by Sagan, Erlich, and their contemporaries.
Now Sagan is dead, gone to his just reward, and the Ehrlichs continue stand by the basic ideas in the book, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in “The Bomb” was that it was much too optimistic about the future” and believe that it achieved their goals because “it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future.”
Right! It was all them, because regular folks are just too stupid to avoid running over the cliff without the intervention of the Brights. And it’s all “for our own good” that we now kill several hundred thousand children and seniors and handicapped people per year because they are not really people, we all know it’s really all just about “free choice” and we have too many of “them” anyway.
“The Population Bomb” was written at the suggestion of David Brower the executive director of the environmentalist Sierra Club, and Ian Ballantine of Ballantine Books following various public appearances Ehrlich had made regarding population issues and their relation to the environment.
The Population Bomb began with the statement: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate … ”
Nothing weaselly about that prediction. Pretty much lays it on the line. And was dead wrong. … but the book was a huge marketing success and made a LOT of money for the players involved. Any questions?
Global cooling will kill us all!!! But they didn’t just have a proposed physical mechanism for this catastrophe. They had the evidence of the temperature record, which showed global temperatures generally declining from about 1940 to 1970. 30 years of data = “certainty about what is going on with earth ecology and climate?”
Which ecology and climate have been “evolving” for … Oh … something like 4.543 billion years. Even Wikipedia tells us that: “Earth is the third planet from the Sun and the only astronomical object known to harbor life. According to radiometric dating and other sources of evidence, Earth formed over 4.5 billion years ago. Earth’s gravity interacts with other objects in space, especially the Sun and the Moon, Earth’s only natural satellite.”
So they looked at 6.60356593e-9% of the data, or examined another way they looked at 0.000000000660356593% of the data and decided that that was enough for a slope graph, after all they already knew what was going on, right? (“Hokey” Stick anyone?) And that minute amount of data led to fevered “scientific” predictions like this one, from UC Davis ecology professor Kenneth Watt:
“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”
My guess is that Professor Kenneth Watt didn’t major in Mathematics. And I am sure that no university professor in history would have graded any student with a pass if that student only came up with 6.60356593e-9% of the data, even if they were “grading on the curve”.
Carl Sagan & Viking Lander Model
As late as 1980, Carl Sagan was still presenting global cooling as one of two possible doomsday scenarios we could choose from. The series “Cosmos“ marks the precise moment of change, when the goal posts were moved. In essence they “flipped the “Hokey Stick Graph” from cold to hot. And yes I do know how to spell Hockey, I’m Canajun, eh?
This is a bit of a cultural time capsule, preserving the precise moment at which scientific alarmists were switching from warning about a new ice age, in the 1970s, to warning about runaway warming in the 90’s.. So, “soft science”, moving goal posts, changing stories, relativism, denial, plausible deniability
It still all boils down to “The sky is falling!!!! Therefore we have to be compelled to give up all control to the “enlightened ones” and do what we are told like good little sheeple because they know best“. They are just so much smarter than us. And as we know, that “solution” always involves some flavor of “there are too many of them and not enough of us” therefore we are compelled to “kill the inconvenient ones”.
Of course Papa Pierre was also a big fanboy of Alfred Charles Kinsey, and we all know where that led us to … NAMBLA et al are founded on the gospel according to Kinsey. In Canada, any opposition to that philosophy is now labeled as a “Hate Crime”.
Do you think that eugenics, abortion and euthanasia are something new we just cooked up? They have all been around for thousands of years … and history shows that every culture which starts killing its children as a part of social policy ultimately fails … always have and always will. World without end, Amen.
So, in Canada, they destroyed the economy in the 80’s in the great 20th century hydrocarbon panic. How, you might ask? Because Papa Doc Pierre, who took a few courses at the London School of Economics in the 60’s knew best, even if he never hung around in England long enough to pick up a degree or even a certificate.
He “Nationalized” the oil industry by buying Gulf Oil and turning it into Petrocan and setting up the NEP to drive away all the other oil companies. The big crash of 82 was when we went to the Arctic for 15 years because there was absolutely no work to be had in the south.
Anyway, here’s a bit of the power plant rant andthat post has the rest of the dirt for coffee break conversation, and please please all of you take care of yourselves and be careful on the ice.
Here’s just a small sample of how many coal plants there are out there:
EU has 468 plants building 27 more for a total of 495 TURKEY has 56 plants building 93 more total 149 SOUTH AFRICA has 79 building 24 more total 103 INDIA has 589 building 446 more total 1036 PHILIPPINES has 19 building 60 more total 79 SOUTH KOREA has 58 building 26 more total 84 JAPAN has 90 building 45 more total 135 USA has 589 building 5 more total 594 CHINA has 2363, building 1171 total 3534 CANADA has 24 total and none planned.
But here comes the NDP to save the planet shutting down our Alberta’s 5 plants and the entire energy sector while they are at it. 5 out of a total of 7208 world coal generation plants is 0.0007 %.
But there is hope, there could be an alternate future, if only we believe … As I mentioned above, I posted about this on my blog here. I realize that I place a lot of emphasis on the web of trust. That is, who do you trust and who do you rely on to get the truth and understanding from which all thought, and decision making and choices ultimately derive.
The truth, that is, “what actually happened” as opposed to what all the Environmental Nazis said was going to happen, is that they were and are actually massively wrong about almost everything they were and are screaming about.
So what about death, or should I say “Death“? What about that final destination to which every single living human being is committed, whether by natural causes, or by some apocalyptic Global Warming holocaust, regardless of their beliefs or lack of same about anything?
I decided that I have rambled on long enough this time and I will put off death to another post … Ha, I wish it was that easy …
“Billy – title theme”, Bob Dylan, from the soundtrack album of “Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid”, (July 1973)
Over the Parapet
It seems that, without fail, every time I raise my head above the parapet to take note of the goings on in the mundane, I quickly observe something that sparks anger and outrage, that provokes me and leads me to sinful behaviour instead of charity and compassion.
My last post here turned into a polemic about how the behaviour of our leadership reflects poorly on us as a nation. I apologize for that post, which turned out to be an ill considered rant by an old fart with a twisted sense of humour and a nasty temper. I am stuck with it forever courtesy of “The Wayback Machine“. Sigh … so I changed some of it.
That reflexive outrage at the venal buffoonery and duplicitous utterances, the “Press Releases”, of the poltroons currently prancing about as our secular, and in some cases religious, betters is a serious occasion of sin for me. So I firmly resolve, for the most part, that I will continue to try to ignore whatever topic du jour has torqued my customers today.
I will avoid following up on stories which seem to make no sense at first, because the real story is often even more anger provoking than the curiosity provoked by the customer’s account of the story. I will strive to continue in, and increase my blissful ignorance of the daily media performance, thus avoiding all provocation and anger in my life.
St. Paul corrects St. Peter …
The next 10 or so paragraphs is just me bragging about why I am qualified to express this opinion – your mileage may vary and you can just skip them if so inclined …
For better or for worse I am blessed/cursed with a combination of personality traits including intelligence, perception, and outspokenness, a willingness to be confrontational when confronted, a desire to direct players away from predictably bad outcomes by pointing out the likelyhood of those outcomes, and offering a measurably better way to accomplish the targeted ends.
I sailed righteously and serenely through my first career in the NAVY, followed by a 10 year stint in the Department of Justice (Corrections) without a blip … I thrived, was promoted to staff officer, and “was mentioned in dispatches“. HA! Life was good.
Then I became a civilian and discovered the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Evil seems to proliferate when there are no immediate consequences for the perpetrators. I was told, by a senior VP no less, soon after gaining employment as a IT professional with a major health region, that the objective of every effort was to place the organization in the bottom 25% of peer organizations.
That was the sweet spot for budgets and effort … never in last place because that attracts lots of negative attention and we are made an example of, … but rather we should strive to always be second or third worst, thereby always getting the lion’s share of budgets to “improve” our performance and incidentally building the Departmental Silos ever taller. I tried my best to accommodate and adapt to the culture of the organization, but perhaps didn’t try hard enough.
Sensei, Sinsang, Sonsaeng, Seonsaeng or Xiansheng is an honorific term shared in Chinese honorifics and Japanese honorifics that is translated as “person born before another” or “one who comes before”, one’s senior or one’s superior perhaps. Another, perhaps better, take is that of Senpai … I guess that would make me the Kohai.
Senpai (先輩, “earlier colleague”) and kōhai (後輩, “later colleague”) are a pair of Japanese words which describe an informal hierarchical interpersonal relationship found in organizations, associations, clubs, businesses, and schools in Japan.
Anyway, I never made a complete change to the civilian way of “doing business”. I was later chastised severely by some senior bosses in my civilian career, for having “an over developed sense of justice“, of right and wrong, which brooked no denial and demanded that the guilty be outed in their bad behavior, even if the guilty happen to be those very bosses.
I can assure you that taking that stance is a career altering decision. On the other hand it keeps one out of prison, and perhaps even out of Hell, so I guess it’s a wash. Senpai? How do you spell whistle-blower? I guess I have an acknowledged talent for being an “annoying a—at” at certain times and with certain people, and that’s all my own fault and my sin. I choose pride and self-righteousness instead of humility and compassion.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
My sister, having spent her corporate career as a director of personnel for a multinational communications company, states that I am a classic ENTJ. I think she majored in Myers Briggsin university (joking), and sees all people through that particular filter but the agreement of my daughter with that analysis based on her own Myers Briggs studies seems to lend it some credibility.
That may be a reason for my behaviour but it does not excuse that behaviour. There is good reason that I spend an ever declining amount of time and resources worrying about and observing the daily goings on of our society outside of my immediate daily existence viewed from my library window.
“Confessions” of St. Augustine
Perhaps all of the above is merely an expression of my own pride, my hunger for approval, and the desire to be “acknowledged as right” and “on the side of the angels”. If I was truly humble and contrite maybe I would not write anything like that, but there really appears to be nothing of lasting value to see or hear in the wider world.
We have only the the current rogues gallery of media idols misbehaving and lying about it, twisting the who, what, when, where, why, to fit their narrative of the day and the public reaction to their latest tweet.
But I have on good authority that even the most egregious scandal monger caught in the very act of wrongdoing, especially in an act of sexual misconduct of some sort, as in “he had been caught in flagrante with the wife of the Association’s Treasurer“, can, in spite of the unlikelihood, experience conversion and repentance and go on to a life of great holiness.
A case in point might be St. Augustine, bishop and doctor of the church … just read Augustine’s “Confessions“ for the whole sordid but eventually uplifting story.
So Lord, from the desire of being right, and being seen to be right, deliver me.
But, what are the irritating highlights of the view over the parapet today? What is my observed truth, my reality?
First, we have the political arena, with Justin and Rachel, and Donald, and a host of other players whose names just don’t stick in my mind because they don’t live in my back yard.
Canadian Political Elite …
We seem lately to have arrived at a place where we, or rather Justin, our favorite proxy, are pissing off everyone, in a minor sort of way, by trying to be polite to everyone, in a minor sort of way.
And all the usual suspects are jingoisticly trying to drum up outrage on all the social media networks about being insulted by China when in fact the Chinese have merely shone a light on the truth. If we look rather slaternly in that light perhaps the solution is to amend our behaviour as a country? But what do I know, here in the boondocks of flyover country, after all I am just another bitter clinger.
The current brass trophy seems to be deciding whether or not to have Chinese spyware in our electronics or American spyware in our electronics, all the while trying to save face and not piss off the bogymen our leaders are most afraid of, which is actually we their own citizens. Sigh … who gives a rip who is spying on us, as long as the electronics work reliably and the related satellites don’t fall out of the sky.
George Soros, 2012, Tides Foundation, et al
Second, we have the religious arena, momentarily being the religion of Material Realism with its whole “everything is just a reactive process” idea, and we can say anything we want about anything at all because all that is real is our narrative of relativity.
That canard gives us all the great evils of the last hundred years or so and lately, global warming or global freezing as the propaganda ministry sees fit to expound on. It also gives plausible cover for whatever tax and power grab the Brights are intent on this month.
For an example of the inverted thinking and writing that this mindset can produce, read this article. And of course in the 70’s (remember the 70’s? They came after the 60″s which no one who was actually there remembers today), anyway, in the 70’s we were all going to die from starvation brought on by over population and global cooling.
“Somewhere In Neverland”, All Time Low, from the album “Don’t Panic”, (2012)
Trust me, I’m smarter than you …
We are doomed unless … sound familiar? Check out the articles here , and here for some entertaining reading about environmentalist’s predictions in the recent past. The malleability of these forecasts boggles the mind but the underlying agenda never changes. FUD conquers all.
The bottom line for the man in the street, in winter Alberta, is that the destruction of the Alberta economy resulting from the FUD being spread about by our leadership at the behest of various anti-western anti-economy, pro socialist environmental groups such as George Soros‘ “Tides Foundation“, and Tides Canada, is far more harmful than any flavor of spyware or foreign information gathering activities through our new fridge or GPS. With any kind of spine we could just ban all American and Chinese products and import everything from South Korea.
What Canada does instead is import our political morals from North Korea and then pretend with much virtue signaling that we are not being screwed over by either the Chinese or the Americans, or anyone else for that matter, depending on the day and the latest tweets on Social Media.
These dubious sources seem to be where most Canadians get most of their “information”. Just for the record, my readers understand that I include the CBC and the BBC in the domain of “Social Media”, with all that that implies with respect to their honesty, accuracy and reliability.
Third, we have spiritual arena, and the current return of ancient syncretism amongst even some nominally catholic authorities. Where to go on that front? Nothing but grief and pitfalls down this path, right? Unless of course one believes that none of it matters anyway, don’t ask, don’t tell, no harm, no foul.
Where do we go when some church leaders seem to be saying that although technically a breach of some code or law or tradition may have occurred there is no need for punishment, apology or retribution if no actual damage occurred.
A rose by any other name … what is Truth? So what to do? What is acceptable to think and talk about then?
Well, following the lead of social media and the progressive materialist members of my family we could “think” about “Global Warming”, right? That’s gonna work out just fine for coffee klatch, also kaf·fee·klatsch (kŏf′ē-klăch′, -kläch′, kô′fē-), also known as a casual social gathering for coffee and conversation.
[Partial translation of German Kaffeeklatsch : Kaffee, coffee + Klatsch, gossip; see klatch.] Elsewhere referred to as “I don’t care about your damned facts Joe, I just want to have a pleasant conversation over coffee with my friends“.
But details and facts actually matter very much. Get your details and facts wrong and you get your decisions and choices wrong. Get your choices wrong and you get your politics and economics wrong. Get your politics and economics wrong and you get Venezuela … and every other failed nation state in the history of the world. Hey! Who cares about details and facts … who cares.
It is the sort of “thinking” that gives us the “Polar Vortex” as a result of “Global Warming’. But “Global Warming” was what the progressives gave us when the “New Ice Age” didn’t pan out in the 70’s and 80’s … just more of the same old story.
Yep. The world is going to come to an end and humans will be extinct in 20 years . . . UNLESS government empowered,billionaire funded, NGO’s strictly control every human being’s existence, activities, and wealth.
It is the same old con game to fleece consumers and screw taxpayers to benefit the political class, their cronies, the big multinationals and the Ubber Wealthy international billionaires that fund the lobbyists. All that glisters is not gold, in fact it is often shyte in a bucket, the staple diet of the chattering classes everywhere.
But I don’t think that what is top of mind in every media venue is particularly newsworthy, or even that we are actually entering into some end-times paroxysm of concentrated misbehavior. We have just become numb to the daily deviance of our society so that we no longer even find it remarkable. It’s just the same old, same old, day to day distillation of venal self love by every actor continuing to mount, and at current levels the concentration, the miasma of perfidity, obscures any sense of sin or decorum that might have remained.
Our societal idols, the players and talking heads reporting on the antics of the royal court, sin, sin mightily, and all the while have absolutely no apparent awareness that we/they are doing anything wrong, that there are undesirable consequences necessarily flowing from every deception, every misdirection, every misrepresentation, every narrative, every attempt to hide and pretend that we are not really doing what we are so obviously doing.
And in my attachment to my own almighty “rightness”, my enlightened understanding of what is going on and the “obvious” outcomes flowing from these daily churnings of the soup in the MSM soup kitchen, I jump to judgement and rail against the “obvious”, with rude aspersions against the characters and actions of all the players, and I sin mightily. I cannot know what goes on in the hearts of men … really, but I “assume” and we all know what that does, right?
So … rant in haste and anger, repent at leisure, or something like that. And again I make my habitual mistake … Who or what am I to make judgements about others … any others? This is probably a real good time for an examination of conscience.
“Hotaru” by Kobudo, from the album “Ototabi”, (2013)
Wondering these days why I think the way I do and about how to encapsulate my point of view, or even if that matters at all. Our society is addicted to tags and classifications by which folks can avoid actually getting to know others and just easily slip them into a convenient box.
I find it far easier to identify what I am NOT than to articulate what I am. Not a right wingnut nor a left wingnut, not a Progressive, not a Socialist, not a Communist, not a Republican, not a Liberal or a Democrat, not a Conservative and still less a New Democrat or National Socialist, not really a “Party Animal” at all.
I find some things to agree with in many of the platforms and much to disagree with in ALL the platforms. I am Catholic but not a hypersuperueberpapalist (to use one of Fr. Hunwicke’s very useful coinages). So what gives me the right to even have an opinion? What am I?
Not a knuckle-dragger regardless of the opinions of sundry relatives, not a fly-over country Luddite clinging to my guns and religion, not really a fan of any fashionable linear classification on some arbitrary plane such as the usual extreme right/extreme left continuum. Not slotted or boxed, as in someone’s poor straw-man.
I see folks rather as a spherical complex of radii of various strengths and lengths embracing the entire gamut of human feelings, positions and thoughts. No linear continuum in that model.
These days, I am more and more thinking that I feel like a “Reactionary“.
Wikipedia defines: “A reactionary is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society. As an adjective, the word reactionary describes points of view and policies meant to restore the status quo ante.
Political reactionaries are at the right-wing of a political spectrum; yet, reactionary ideologies can be radical, in the sense of political extremism, in service to re-establishing the status quo ante. In political discourse, being considered a reactionary is generally regarded as negative (ed. at least it is amongst the Left-wingnuts); yet the descriptor “political reactionary” has been adopted by the likes of the Austrian monarchist Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, the Scottish journalist Gerald Warner of Craigenmaddie, the Colombian political theologist Nicolás Gómez Dávila, and the American historian John Lukacs. ”
Seems like a good start. Where do I go from here? Well, looking at the world outside my corner office, my electronic library of antiestablishmentarianism … always remembering, of course, that what words mean can change, sometimes quite rapidly depending on who is spouting the words in question.
My usage of that nice long word means this to me: antiestablishmentarianism is a political philosophy that views a nation’s or society’s power structure as corrupt, repressive, exploitative, or unjust.
And of course whoever is out of power at any particular moment of time tend to believe that the philosophy in power is “corrupt, repressive, exploitative, or unjust”, right? Whoever is not you is wrong, right?
So that’s my plan for the next few posts … to think about the political arena for a bit, then to think about the religious arena for a bit, and finally to dip into the spiritual arena from a current Catholic perspective.
So to refocus on the all important spiritual domain rather than the vacuous banality of the mundane I will conclude with a link to a tremendously important homily by Fr. Chad Ripperger at Sensus Traditionis. This homily is slightly over an hour long and is perhaps the best single encapsulation of our global reality that I have ever listened to. It is truly well worth the hour of your time.
The only certainty for humanity is grim death. It is how you lived your life and the principles you stood for, that will tip the scale one way or the other on judgement day.
Denying that there will be a judgement day is just ad-hominem claptrap offered by people with no discernible factual base to their belief system.
I am often amazed at the ignorance giving rise to the unfounded belief that somehow mankind is “good” and “deserving” in and of itself … kind of a mish-mash of good intentions and naturally nice giving rise to the notion that Christianity gave us nothing and we are all going somewhere nice when the show is over … hmmm. Many folks, ignorant of history and the reality of the pre-Christian world, believe, like little children, that every one is nice and good and if we would all agree and go along with the progressives everything would be just peachy keen.
I am reminded of a scene from “Life of Brian” namely “”What Have The Romans Ever Done For Us?”
“Somewhere In Neverland”, All Time Low, from the album “Don’t Panic”, (2012)
Captains Log, Stardate 20170622.1311
Line One: First the plain English version: FLASH MESSAGE: ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT HAPPENING! OR MAYBE IT STILL IS BUT its definitely SLOWER THAN WE THOUGHT, and we are not so sure of our data … ummm, well, about that … it would appear that the observed real world data over the last 20 years are less extreme than the projected temperatures expected from our models. We believe that this may be attributable to variability in the real world climate which may be more complex than our computer models …
As every living person on the planet, with no letters after their name, has been saying for almost 30 years, and Al Gore’s carbon profile notwithstanding, it would appear that the science is not nearly as settled as all the scare tactics that the usual talking heads have been screaming at us forever.
In fact the science is SO UNSETTLED THAT IT APPEARS EVEN THE CLIMATISTAS are clearly backtracking (somewhat) behind a veritable tsunami of baffle-gab otherwise known and identified as BS by regular folks.
Q: When is a religion not a religion? – A: When it is sincerely believed by the progressive left and they get a lot of taxpayer’s money for forcing our conversion to their religion, and their favorite academics get a lot of grants for making up models that support their religious views. P.T. Barnum would be so jealous.
Even though this article published about the little data problem is locked up behind a paywall where only the people who wrote it can actually read it it would seem that without 40 years of academic training no regular human being could conceivably understand what was written anyway.
For the rest of us we have to rely on amateur translation and supposition – just see line ONE (above) for the plain English version.
So are we going to recover all the Trillions of dollars spent in this biggest scam in the history of science? IN YOUR DREAMS TAXPAYING WIENNIE!
Nature Geoscience (2017) doi:10.1038/ngeo2973, Received 23 December 2016, Accepted 22 May 2017, Published online 19 June 2017
Mr. “Settled Science” Gore. GEE! What’s that funny smell?
“In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble. Because observations and coupled model simulations do not have the same phasing of natural internal variability, such decadal differences in simulated and observed warming rates invariably occur. Here we analyse global-mean tropospheric temperatures from satellites and climate model simulations to examine whether warming rate differences over the satellite era can be explained by internal climate variability alone. We find that in the last two decades of the twentieth century, differences between modelled and observed tropospheric temperature trends are broadly consistent with internal variability. Over most of the early twenty-first century, however, model tropospheric warming is substantially larger than observed; warming rate differences are generally outside the range of trends arising from internal variability. The probability that multi-decadal internal variability fully explains the asymmetry between the late twentieth and early twenty-first century results is low (between zero and about 9%). It is also unlikely that this asymmetry is due to the combined effects of internal variability and a model error in climate sensitivity. We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.”
The above paragraph of gratuitous greenhouse gas is the closest that “THE MAJORITY OF CLIMATOLOGISTS” can bring themselves to admitting that they just might have been mistaken for longer than most folks careers, or at least the data appear to be questionable! It is all just so pathetic, just so purblind pathetic.
“Cattle and other farm animals are major sources of methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide as a heat-trapping gas. Methane is released when they belch, pass gas and make manure. ”
‘If we can reduce emissions of methane, we can really help to slow global warming,” said Ryan McCarthy, a science adviser for the California Air Resources Board, which is drawing up rules to implement the new law.
“Livestock are responsible for 14.5 percent of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, with beef and dairy production accounting for the bulk of it, according to a 2013 United Nations report.” . . .
Another travesty by the same academics who have the sheer ineffable gall to write the above baffle-gab about their best and brightest efforts to prove Global Warming exists? Seriously? Oh yea!
“Somewhere In Neverland”, All Time Low, from the album “Don’t Panic”, (2012)
Well, I suppose the last two posts about Alberta’s energy future might be a little depressing, even frightening if one falls into the trap of feeling that it is all going to happen tomorrow. Seriously?
The NDP are proposing a path forward so vast and far reaching that there is no conceivable way it could be executed in any time frame less than a generation.
Just take a breath and remember that the same crowd who are now wailing that the global warming sky is falling were wailing about millions dieing in the new ice age back in the 70’s.
To have even a chance of success in implementing their master plan we are positing an NDP government, who previously never ran anything more complex than a protest movement, will suddenly start operating an economy – completely divorced from global reality – more efficiently, and with more integrity of motives, and with better planning than any other government in the history of the world.
Alberta’s 82 billion annually of exports to the US – the rest don’t really count
The 30th general election of Alberta, Canada, will take place on or before May 31, 2019, following a request by Premier Rachel Notley to the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta to dissolve the legislature.
So, the bald truth is Rachel and her gang have no more than 900 days to change the world.
And the entire period she and her boys and girls will be facing President Trump and the U.S.A. who will be busily rewriting all the rules about what they can actually implement because virtually all of Alberta’s production of resources and manufacturing goes to the U.S. at around 82 billion in 2012, (the last available year of data).
Does anyone except a progressive dreamer really think that the NDP will convert Trump and the US from an anti-global warming position to a global warming warrior? Seriously?
Words walk, dollars talk and all Rachel and her hugger mugger babies have are words. It is a difficult stretch to believe that the NDP seriously think that they are going to dictate to private corporations and foreign governments how they shall conduct business and where they will work and invest.
Who do you think will make the real economic decisions and control what the economic map looks like? The NDP? Uhn Uhn …
The Great Canadian Carbon Tax being pushed down our throats by the Ottawa Liberals has focused my thoughts on the multitude of fallacies built into the “settled science” of global warming. Can you see the error hiding in my title? Probably not, if you are the product of the “modern” education system.
This is because the obvious cultural biases of a late-20th-century modern progressive exhibit a crystal clear animus against the profit motive and a pre-established belief that industrial civilization is “ravaging the earth.”
Again, these are the obvious cultural biases of any late-20th-century modern progressive from the most ignorant, uneducated, or trained, up to and including those with the exalted title of PhD (a misnomer if there ever was one – how does one earn a “Doctorate in Philosophy” in a system that doesn’t even teach or value philosophy).
And, to our civilization’s great misfortune, these folks predominate and proliferate in overwhelming numbers in the modern educational system at all levels and in the vast and ever increasing halls and offices of government. This creates a perpetual feedback loop such that all one can hear is the overwhelming screeching of this colossal flock of aggrieved progressives shrieking “Mine”, “Mine”, “Mine”as they impale the sails of our national and global economy.
So in the “Global Warming Theory” debate the proponents of the “evil industrial complex” theory offer us a binary choice to consider only two alternative theories (each attributable to the “evil profit driven industrial complex”) —that we are destroying the planet by cooling it down, or we are destroying the planet by heating it up—and calls proliferate for more of other people’s money to figure out which is correct.
But this bias prevents anyone from seriously considering an obvious third option: that our effect on the Earth’s climate is negligible, that any heating or cooling is within the normal range of natural variations, and the empirical, provable, measurable, fact based benefits of industrial civilization far outweigh any possible “theoretical” negative effects. But if we don’t treat this as an option, much less as an equally likely option, no government funding (other people’s money again) is likely to be devoted to pursuing that theory. Any person bold enough to suggest this third path is immediately vilified and marginalized as a “Denier”.
This is the original sin of the “Global Warming Theory” religion: that it was founded in a presumption of guilt against industrial civilization. All of the billions of dollars in government research funding (other people’s money) and the entire vast cultural establishment that has been built up around global warming in academia and government, were founded on the presumption that we already knew the conclusion—we’re “ravaging the planet”—and we’re only interested in evidence that supports that conclusion. Just follow the money …
On other fronts, we are experiencing an “unusually cold” October – temperatures have not risen above zero degrees Celsius for a while and the projections are for more of the same. Is there any truth to the theory that temperature is a zero sum game and that because we are colder than normal, somewhere else on the planet other people are warmer than normal.
This sounds a lot like the theory that wealth is a zero sum game and that because some have more there must necessarily be others who have less because of that and it is the role of government to take that “excess wealth” and redistribute to others who have less, to “balance the playing field” for the uninformed and who will coincidentally vote for the folks giving away the freebies thus perpetuating the above mentioned feedback loop.
So we have an absolutely orgasmic situation for progressives in the form of a “Carbon Tax” which allows us to fix the “theoretical” Global Warming problem while at the same time redistributing the “excess wealth” to more deserving program recipients. WOW! A twofer! Progressive Nirvana …
Oh Earth Oh Earth Return, Bill Douglas, 1996
Now, let’s take a moment to talk about “truth”. Science can never prove a theory “true” (by definition), but can only ever proceed down a path of ever increasing attempts to disprove the theory. So it is obvious to anyone that “truth” really has no place at all in science. By “truth” I mean what is “really” going on.
Science can’t really help us with “Truth” because science really can’t tell us what is really going on. All science can do is show that any “theory” enables us to make predictions with a fair degree of reliability, about what will happen if we do “X”, or don’t do “Y”. Science is straying out of it’s ballpark when it starts dabbling in “causes”.
Truth has to do with ultimate causes, which are always elusive and beyond the realm of science. Science deals with theories, usually mathematical, which predict outcomes of experiments. For example, if we drop a rock off a cliff, the law of gravity combined with theories of air resistance and other forces can be used to calculate just how long it will take to hit the ground, and how fast it will go, etc.
But science does not and cannot answer the question of just exactly what gravity is, or why things fall to the ground. It just states that given certain conditions, they will fall. Likewise, we can observe all kinds of weather phenomena and we can say with some degree of reliability that when certain phenomena are observed in some degree of conjunction then certain other outcomes become “more likely”.
Does anyone understand that % verbiage more precisely than if the weather people were simply saying “It might rain” or “It might not rain” or even more obviously “we don’t really know for sure but our opinion is:”. So too with “Global Warming theory”. The proponents seem quite willing to sacrifice the good of all on the alter of their opinion dressed up in the lipstick of “settled science”.
We have “weather forecasts”, and “storm warnings” and numerous other products of humanity’s attempts to predict climate outcomes, but as soon as we slide into making pronouncements about “causes” we have left the realm of science and ventured into the realms of opinion or even religious belief.
Whatever the facts may be, any statement about “settled science” in relation to weather and climate, only reveals a great lack of understanding on the part of the speaker. The speaker is appealing to an authority which does not exist to support an opinion which may or may not have any element of truth in it at all.
We most often hear these types arguments in the schoolyards or after work in the bars and often in government circles and the lower levels of academia, but the vehemence of the debate simply does not add anything to the veracity of the claims. Of course the arguments, at least in government and academia, are invariably followed by demands for more of other people’s money. Just follow the money ….
In general, science answers questions like “how,” “when,” “where”, but never “why” in the ultimate sense. Our medieval ancestors understood Theology to be the queen of the sciences. Her twin sister Sophia (the Greek word for “Wisdom”) was also venerated in the discipline of Philosophy. It was hard to tell the two beauties apart, but together they once ruled the many domains of human knowledge because they dealt with “Truth” and “Ultimate Causes”. In our modern Progressive Western English society Philosophy and Theology are increasingly irrelevant backwaters
As an example of the interplay of the 3 concepts of observations, theories and truth, consider the courtroom. The observations may be that a man was seen shooting a gun and that the person hit by the bullet died. The theory may be that it was cold-blooded murder, but the truth may be that it was self-defense.
Truth tends to be invisible and hidden, such as someone’s motives, whereas observations are usually visible. Courts are very interested in truth, where the motive (the ultimate cause) for actions is given considerable weight. The distinction between first-degree and second degree murder is based on intent. Motives are not as yet observable in science, and hence are beyond science.
So it is also with the word “Fact“. The word “fact” has several meanings, which can be very confusing. In popular usage it can mean either “observation,” “theory,” or “truth.” As an example of each, one can say, “it is a fact that every time I have dropped this ball, it fell to the ground.” That is what has been observed so far, and the word “fact” can be replaced with “observation.”
One can also say, “it is a fact that every time I have dropped this ball, gravity pulled it to the ground.” Even though this statement appears very similar to the first, “gravity” really refers to a theory proposed to explain why the ball is observed to fall. Finally, if one so thoroughly believes that the theory of gravity is really “true,” he could replace “a fact” with “true,” which would take the meaning beyond science into the realm of his personal convictions or beliefs.
This confusion can often be avoided by always replacing the word “fact” with “observation,” “theory” or “truth,” whichever seems to convey the intended meaning best. Remember that if the meaning is “observation,” then it is as fallible as the observer. If it is a “theory,” then it also could be dis-proven someday.
If it is claimed to be “truth,” then it is a statement of the personal conviction of the speaker, which is outside the domain of science. There is no such animal in our real world, fact based, menagerie as “settled science” or “truth”. The existence of these beasts are firmly rooted in the world of personal conviction or belief.
But here in flyover country we still have to pay more now to heat our colder houses. And it is calculated (in the same way that we calculate how fast a ball will fall to earth when dropped) that these changes to our daily reality embodied in a Carbon Tax based on the “settled science” of global warming will cost us all about $2500 per year or somewhere north of $200 per month.
Now, if you work for academia or government at any level then this is a trivially insignificant change because everything you get paid is all other people’s money anyway. You are the folks playing in the tax pool and splashing money around like water.
For the real taxpayers – those who actually create wealth or work for folks who create wealth and actually put real money into the tax pool for the swimmers to splash around in – this is a real palpable hit amounting to perhaps 10% of one’s remuneration. And still we see no noticeable gubmint programs on the horizon to provide “heating cost relief” – yet.
This blurb is just the gathering of info, or what passes for info, from around the net. How can that be seen as uncharitable? Am I making judgements here or just allowing others’ to reach conclusions on their own by presenting disparate items in a targeted sequence? Allusions and aspersions all in the same slough.
Solipsism (Listeni/ˈsɒlᵻpsɪzəm/; from Latin solus, meaning “alone”, and ipse, meaning “self”) is the philosophical idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside of the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist.
VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – The Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation (CTF) has come out swiftly against the federal Liberals’ carbon tax plan, saying it will cost the average Canadian family $2,569 more in taxes every year by 2022. The plan, revealed in the House of Commons today, will establish a “floor price” on carbon pollution of $10 a tonne in 2018, rising to $50 a tonne by 2022.
Will whoever replaces the Liberals as the Natural Governing Party of Canada continue with these policies or roll them back? Has any government in this country or anywhere, when returned to power after a hiatus, ever rolled back policies which the opposition decried when out of power. Brexit comes to mind but that wasn’t about the revenue, was it? Anyone remember that roll back happening ever when revenue was the question? I don’t remember a single incident except when it involved changing spending priorities rather than rolling it back. It was that way with the old helicopter scandal under Chretien.
In other news: Saskatchewan’s first blast of wintry weather has hit the province hard. By the morning, up to 40 centimeters had fallen on some communities and according to Environment Canada, another 10-15 cm was expected to fall during the day.
So we NEED to do this carbon tax thingy to save the planet for our children … right? While colder winters continue to rise in the U.S., many aren’t sure which factors to attribute such extreme weather and freezing temperatures to.
The question might be posed, how can it be global warming when it snowed in places like Phoenix and Las Vegas last year? The truth is, global warming doesn’t just mean the earth is supposed to turn into an all-out fireball. To the skeptics, however, the persistent weather and climate changes are dismissed as pure happenstance. Is global warming even real?
Whatever the proponents and skeptics say, we can be absolutely certain that this new Canadian Carbon Tax is ABSOLUTELY NOT just another tax grab in a long line of tax grabs by government under many names. The Federal and Provincial governments would NEVER lie to us, eh?
Funny how the 40’s tune “D-Day Dodgers” popped up when I heard Justin declare he would prefer to make mistakes while speaking “ rather than to be inauthentic … and hyper-controlled and totally scripted the way other people are.”
Mr. Trudeau, like Lady Astor, standing on a platform and talking tommyrot, just like the D-Day Dodgers we are, we workers who have no say, and who pay for all the government folderol. And of course why should Justine care a wit since he doesn’t pay any of his own bills and never has in this life – born with a silver spoon and moved on from Daddy’s fortune to the taxpayer’s dollar in one smooth progression.
SO! Pop Quiz! Another time – same government – same party, who remembers inflation and indexing in the 80’s? Why wasn’t the income tax grid indexed? Why was the income tax level the ONLY item not indexed by the Federal Liberals? I guess Mr. Martin figured Canadians were too stupid to notice this HUGE stealth tax grab, and even if they did they probably would not leave, or the government could always just lie about it.
And in OTTAWA — Justin Trudeau has heard the naysayers. He knows “cynics” say he’s all flash and no substance, and that there are those who believe Canadians are turning out to see him only because of his famous last name and good looks. He knows some are wondering how he, of all people, can claim to want to fight for the middle class, or when the next time he’ll put his foot in his mouth will be.
So the question remains: Are The Elites Out Of Touch? This isn’t a new meme; nor is the notion that the “little people” can’t look after themselves; nor is the reality that folks would rather believe what they think they know than what they actually know because at the root of it all we actually know nothing. And it is what we don’t know we don’t know that always bites our ass.
And here is another version of that 40’s tune ” The D-Day Dodgers” . I guess it reflects the perennial reality, and the media of the day were as cavalier with the truth then as they are now – anything goes in pursuit of a good lead.
Of course, there is no record that she actually said this, in or out of Parliament, and she herself denied ever saying it. What can we ever know when even the Pope changes transcripts of what was said at events.
A reference to a “D-Day Dodger” was bitingly sarcastic, given the steady stream of allied service personnel who were being killed or wounded in combat on the Italian front. A “Dodger” is someone who avoids something; the soldiers in Italy felt that their sacrifices were being ignored after theinvasion of Normandy, and a “D-Day Dodger” a reference to someone who was supposedly avoiding real combat by serving in Italy, whereas the reality was anything but.
Just another classic case of an idea which the elite got totally wrong, and the folk ran with because of their personal leanings pro or against the government of the day or perhaps the particular MP in question. Nothing much changes under the sun as long as people are involved. I bet the Roman Empire’s media were the same as ours are now, just slower because they had no internet.
Whatever … we watch the media spin the story, along for another wonderful progressive ride, just like the D-Day Dodgers on their way to Casino, but thankfully not taking enemy fire (yet).
Always remember, “Be charitable in your judgements, and never take yourself too seriously”
Now it appears that the Pope is about to enter the fray with an “encyclical on the environment“. This is a much more definitive proclamation that “his extemporaneous remarks at the University of Molise“. David warren has hit it on the head here “On the “science” behind this — in fact, scientism — I have no reason to trust the advisers appointed, and many reasons to doubt them. They are for the most part not Christian themselves, let alone Catholic, and they represent very worldly vested interests. Huge amounts of money are at stake, in maintaining the “climate change” scare, and the ideological position behind them is unmistakable. These are men in pursuit of power, who wish to create vast new regulatory agencies to trump the existing worldly powers. They propose to compound large evils with an even greater evil. I only hope norms of Catholic teaching aren’t disturbed, while dancing with devils like these.
“Scientific consensus” is a bawd. There was a scientific consensus against Galileo Galilei — even greater across Protestant northern Europe than among his ex-friends in the University of Bologna. The Church is still paying today, for bowing to the scientific consensus of 1616. More broadly, the history of scientific consensus is more or less identical with the history of scientific error. Indeed, scientific truths are discerned, typically if not always, by one man outside the scientific consensus. (Sometimes they are two or three.) The dissenting voice is usually punished. … (more)
One would hope that perhaps the Catholic Church might just be able to square the circle without supplanting God for progressive fashion., but maybe not, and I have seen and heard crazier things in my short life.
I will wait to see the real thing. The many competing interests on both sides of this issue will be in a great rush to spin this product to suite their own slant and agenda. I have no doubt that few will actually read what it says and those who do will be drowned in a tsunami of dreck as the various parties scream for attention.
My bias is that I believe that yet again the Vatican is about to come down on the wrong side of history in another area of scientific controversy. I detect a distinct smell of sulfur in those cloistered halls these days. Chasing the twitter feed seldom has good results.
Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately.
Hence the frothing effort to discredit deniers by all the usual self interests wanting to spend trillions of other people’s dollars on their pet religion while willfully ignoring such atrocities as China’s “One Child Policy”.
This demonstrated willingness to embrace even killing the defenseless, places the climate change priests squarely alongside such Social Policy leaders as Hitler (the final solution) Stalin (Gulag re-education camps), Mao (Cultural Revolution), Pol Pot (killing fields), and so on.
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.
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.
Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately