Saturday, February 24, 2007

Naturally Seven


Friday, February 23, 2007

When Idiots Gather...

"I think that Iraq is going to go down in history as the greatest disaster in American foreign policy," Albright said, with former President Jimmy Carter at her side in one of a series of "Conversations at the Carter Center."

I absolutely disagree. I think once serious individuals look back at the liberation of Iraq it will be seen as a watershed event in the region. Currently we do have the luxury of looking back and seeing a couple of true disasters in American foreign policy:

The article contains a little of the Jimmy Carter's worldview that we all know produced some fruits of its own:

Carter, who also has been critical of U.S. military action in Iraq, said that since Albright was secretary of state, "there has been a reduction almost all over the world in trust and esteem by foreigners toward Americans."

He said much of it is "because of an unprecedented policy toward the utilization of military power."

Carter said all previous presidents have said the United States would go to war only if its security was endangered, but that President Bush made it clear that there is a new policy of pre-emptive war.

"That is, we're going to go to war if we think that some time in the future a nation might do something that causes our security to be in danger," the former president said. That is a dramatic change that "has resonated all over the world," Carter said.

Humm.... such wisdom.

Monday, February 19, 2007

Lumps of Cells

Just a lump of tissue with no feelings, no chance to live outside the womb. Not a human yet, not deserving of the same rights of life that the rest of us enjoy.

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Democrats: Then and Now

Stumbled on to this at YouTube:

Nancy Pelosi here is a little reminder of what the President said about imminent threats in his 2003 State of the Union speech:

"Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes.

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

Sunday, February 11, 2007

We All Know...

It amazes me that the same people that believe the Bush administration had something to do with the 9/11 attacks ( despite a few obvious clues indicating otherwise like where are all those passengers, how did explosives on the support columns get planted in one of the busiest buildings in the world without being seen? ) are the very save people that will confidently tell us "There were no WMD in Iraq". They refuse to consider that a tyrant who flew his air force to his enemy's territory to escape destruction during the first Gulf War just might load up some trucks on the eve of the next war and drive them to his regional Baathist friend for safe keeping... or simply buried them in a vast desert... or perhaps we simply haven't found enough of them to constitute a 'stockpile' in these people's minds. Yet they assure us from time to time that 'We all know there were no WMD's in Iraq'.

I've always noticed that common sense isn't so common.

More Inconvenient Truths

Here's my position on Global Warming... the universe is not static; it is dynamic; the only universal certainty is change. The idea of 'Time' is a way to determine the rate of this change. So the Earth at any given time, with or without Man, with or without Life, is either warming or cooling.

Additionally I believe that homo sapiens is not much more than a hairless ape that has developed a sense of self but is not yet deserving of the intellectual arrogance found with the modern 'Chicken-little' approach to global warming. Considering the limited intellectual capacity Nature and evolution have given the species on average, it not difficult to understand how supposition and illogical conclusions are often confused as being 'facts'. I think this idea that God created the entire universe solely for Man is evidence of that unearned arrogance. It is an expression of one of the most common fallacies of reasoning; the Hasty Generalization In the case of the global warming panacea this fallacy is generalized in this way; "There is conclusive evidence that the average global temperature is rising and we humans are the cause of it".

So too is this automatic assumption that because the climate is warming Man is necessarily the cause of it. My personal experience, living most of my life in one place and seeing the patterns change, is that yes it seems to be getting warmer. When I was young the months of Fall were cold and snow in October was not unusual. Now it is late October before the Fall rains even begin. So I see the months shifting. May is what April used to be and November is what October used to be.

In that period I have also lived through a few complete solar cycles, three massive volcanic eruptions, several el/la nina cycles and have noticed they too had a very noticeable effect on the immediate climate. These events have been going on far longer than the hairless ape has blessed the Earth with its presence.

I think the greatest cause of global warming is due to orbital cycles and output fluctuations of the Sun in relation to sea temperatures ( keep in mind that the Earth's surface is mostly water). Mankind and all its efforts dwarf to insignificance when compared to these natural physical phenomena.

There are three major orbital cycles called the Milankovich Cycles.

Eccentricity has a periodicity of 100,000 years.
In simplest terms the Earth's orbit goes from an ellipse to a somewhat circular orbit.

Axial Tilt has a periodicity of 41,000 years.
The tilt of the Earth changes 3 degrees every 41,000 years. Axial tilt is what creates the seasons.
Precession has a periodicity of 23,000 years.
As the tilted Earth moves along its orbit it wobbles on its axis like a spinning top winding down. This compounds the complexity of when, in terms of orbital location, the seasons occur. The periodicity of Precession can be sub-divided to a time frame more applicable to the current theories of man-made global warming.

1/1 Period= 23,000.00 yrs 360.00 degrees of Precession
1/2 Period= 11,500.00 yrs 180.00 degrees of Precession
1/4 Period= 5,750.00 yrs 090.00 degrees of Precession
1/8 Period= 2,875.00 yrs 045.00 degrees of Precession
1/16 Period= 1,437.50 yrs 022.50 degrees of Precession

From this table it should be apparent that a sizable amount of precession occurs in a relatively short period of geologic time. Remember this when an adherent to the idea that global warming is man-made uses nice little graphs to present a short-term view of variations within long-term cycles.

Now couple these orbital variations with climatic influences due to solar variations on ocean temperatures plus tectonic dynamism and it should be quite apparent that humans did not cause the effect of these large-scale events nor can the little hairless-chimp stop the inertia of these natural processes. Any species' quest is to simply hang on for the ride in the way their ancestors did.. adapt or die.


Even if we are all at the mercy of Nature it does not mean that we should not endeavor to improve and maintain our environment for our and future generations' quality of life. Yes, we need to reduce the amount of crap we are putting in the air and aquifers. We need to make alternate sources of energy economically viable. We need to aim to be like that little message I've seen in various places: "Take what you need, No more No Less, When you're done, Clean up your mess".

In the end when the advocates of human induced global warming get into the details of their belief it is usually just concerns about short-term environmental concerns; our water or air and natural resources. They tend to 'sex-up' their environmental concerns and sell their case with visions of wailing and gnashing of teeth.

In order to adapt we need to get rid of all the politically driven hysteria and address the real issues like clean air, clean water and clean energy. Not as a threat to the planet but as a way to improve quality of life.

Let Us Review

The New York Times and the MSM in general simply do not get it. I don't recall electing them to be the watchdog of our government and I cannot find anywhere in our Constitution a single sentence empowering them to that position.

Maybe it's just me. I'm not a legal scholar so unfortunately I have to interpret the Constitution and its amendments in the language used to compose and sell it to the common man. I also realize that for every right assured to the People there is also an implicit responsibility. For instance, the First Amendment gives us the right to freely practice our religion and the right to speak, write and publish. Lastly it gives us the right to assemble, in a peaceful manner, for common cause against the government.

Nowhere does it place 'The Press' as the arbiter of those rights for the People. That is the job of the courts. The New York Times is a commercial entity in the private sector. It has no statutory function as the guardian of Truth, Justice and The American way but in exercising the right to speak, write and publish it is bound by statutory obligations just like the rest of 'We The People'. In the past it has earned by commercial acclamation and reasonable temperance the role of 'the paper of record'. Currently they have declined so that they no longer make that claim.

Because it finds itself in a position of power and influence it should not construe that it has a blessing to be a little more equal than any of the rest of us. The decline of their circulation ought to be interpreted as a good indicator of the level of disconnect with reality they are experiencing.

I can no longer take seriously any claim they have of objectivity. The mission is to get Bush whatever the cost. Because if it turns out that Bush has been right all along then it necessarily follows that they and their entire world view have been wrong, for decades. Their worldview will be the true miserable failure.

I believe history will prove just that. As each brick crumbles in the deluded world they have created for themselves they will spin and spin furiously for self-preservation but all the edifices they need to anchor to: the confidence of the American people, the courage to actually admit love of one's country, that "WE" are not the world, that George Bush is not the enemy, that irrational religious zealots won't stop attacking us until we conform to their de-evolved views by submission or death, that nation comes before party; those things most Americans have no problem understanding, then the editorial philosophy of the New York Times is directly responsible for its downfall and will be deemed nothing more than the premiere mouthpiece for the DNC.

But they don't get it...

2002 State of the Union Address

The Bush Manifesto:

Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. And, second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world. (Applause.)

Our military has put the terror training camps of Afghanistan out of business, yet camps still exist in at least a dozen countries. A terrorist underworld -- including groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Jaish-i-Mohammed -- operates in remote jungles and deserts, and hides in the centers of large cities.

While the most visible military action is in Afghanistan, America is acting elsewhere. We now have troops in the Philippines, helping to train that country's armed forces to go after terrorist cells that have executed an American, and still hold hostages. Our soldiers, working with the Bosnian government, seized terrorists who were plotting to bomb our embassy. Our Navy is patrolling the coast of Africa to block the shipment of weapons and the establishment of terrorist camps in Somalia.

My hope is that all nations will heed our call, and eliminate the terrorist parasites who threaten their countries and our own. Many nations are acting forcefully. Pakistan is now cracking down on terror, and I admire the strong leadership of President Musharraf. (Applause.)

But some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake about it: If they do not act, America will. (Applause.)

Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction. Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since September the 11th. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.

Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.

Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. (Applause.) And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.

We'll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons. (Applause.)

Our war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun. This campaign may not be finished on our watch -- yet it must be and it will be waged on our watch.

We can't stop short. If we stop now -- leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked -- our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight. (Applause.)

Michele McNally: "Right there with the Mahdi army. Incredible courage."