Archives for the month of: June, 2012

One tab, one space, never more in the same place.

I’ve decided to post the link:

http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/the-nigger-word/

because of the extreme nature of the subject matter of ThePointman’s subject. Still, he is very insightful, and knowing exactly what he means, and why it matters to all forms of hate and demeaning activity makes it worth reading and sharing. All of it. He makes many sound points worth considering and incorporating. He is using an older word in place of a newer one for affect, but you realize that. I’m just pointing it out for the sake of formality.

He makes the point that it really boils down to fear. We must NEVER walk in fear. He talks about fighting some things, but never people, but I’ll point out that we must stand for what is right. We must stand for truth. We must stand for what we believe. The things against right, truth, and effective belief will always show themselves, and standing FOR the good, naturally combats the bad.

Stand for truth. Stand for what is right. Do good to all, especially those who oppose you.

 

 

Well, for four days of it any way. The Oklahoma District Royal Rangers runs JLTA (Junior Leadership Training Academy) each summer at Camp Adventure, near Chandler, Oklahoma. Check here: http://royalrangers.com/training/junior/ and http://www.oklahomaroyalrangers.org/

I work with the AJTC group, which is the second year of the program (most age 13 to 15). (There is a zero year, ATC, first year is JTC (Junior Training Camp), then AJTC (Advanced JTC), then two options, then they can apply for the elite (fifth year). They work drill and ceremony with sabers, and they are leaders of the other groups. Back to my group, AJTC, they focus on knots and lashing, and they have some leadership tasks. We review knots and lashing. They lash a simple 6′ x 2′ X-braced rectangle, then we build a 1/3-scale model of a 20′-tall tower. Read the rest of this entry »

The article and the comments are worth reading and applicable to any debate. A commitment to truth is a commitment to all that is good–a commitment to life itself. ——————–

Readers may recall my original post, Nature’s ugly decision: ‘Deniers’ enters the scientific literature. followed by Dr. Paul Bain Responds to Critics of Use of “Denier” Term with thanks to Jo Nova, be sure to bookmark and visit her site Dr. Robert G. Brown of Duke University, commenting as rgbatduke, made a response that was commented on by several here in that thread. As commenter REP put it in the update: It is eloquent, insightful and worthy of consideration. I would say, it is likely the best response I’ve ever seen on the use of the “denier” term, not to mention the CAGW issue in general. Thus, I’ve elevated it a full post. Please share the link to this post widely. – Anthony

Dr. Robert G. Brown writes:The tragic thing about the thoughtless use of a stereotype denier is that it reveals that you really think of people in terms of its projected meaning. In particular, even in your response you seem to equate the term “skeptic” with “denier of AGW”.

via A response to Dr. Paul Bain’s use of ‘denier’ in the scientific literature | Watts Up With That?.

As a Nature article, I assume it is paywalled, and I’ll not pay. As Willis says, “There has to be a better way to do science.” But how do they account for their assertions on the basins being different and the circulations being so significantly different? According to Dr. Scotese, this is the way the earth looked 14 Mya: http://www.scotese.com/miocene.htm . The only difference I can see is substantially higher sea level. I notice the caption for the global map indicates it would have been about the same as today starting about 20 Mya. I notice he stipulates “Antarctica was covered by ice and the northern continents were cooling rapidly.” I assume rapid means a half-dozen degrees C over about 15 million years.

How can LaRiviere et al justify claims of such magnitude over such minute differences? It seems silly at best. Primary global circulation has always been considered key to an ice-free earth. Obviously that is impossible, even with the straights (where we now have canals) somewhat open. Of course, my understanding of premodern continental configuration and circumglobal ocean circulation can be flawed and outdated, and the base theory may be wrong, but they are asserting that the ocean was different with no apparent means whereby it might have been. Dr. Scotese suggests sea level and relative land area (and especially ice) are important factors in long-term climate change. I suppose, but the effect cannot be dominant, or we would have never gotten this cold in the first place. http://www.scotese.com/moreinfo15.htm (I suppose I should allow that something may have changed to start the cooling and increasing land and ice keep causing cooling, but then why did we stop? Why have we only gotten this cold? Our current ice age is already over 2 million years running. Why have we stalled at 285 K? Why didn’t we go down to 283 K as we did many millions of years ago? Why didn’t we go even colder? Whatever it is, it sure seems a stretch to attribute significance to CO2!

As a Nature article, I assume it is paywalled, and I’ll not pay. As Willis says, “There has to be a better way to do science.” But how do they account for their assertions on the basins being different and the circulations being so significantly different? According to Dr. Scotese, this is the way the […]

View original post

While the key must be improvements in sanitation, the obvious “good” in this article is vaccines. Please support vaccination programs in all ways. Avail yourself and your children to vaccines, and support efforts to vaccinate all over the world.

While the key must be improvements in sanitation, the obvious “good” in this article is vaccines. Please support vaccination programs in all ways. Avail yourself and your children to vaccines, and support efforts to vaccinate all over the world.

View original post

Good article, and good comments below it. For me, it is wise for us humans to remember our place. We also must remember that time and space are too big for us to condense into images that fit nicely in our daily lives. We cannot assume. We must keep in mind that life is fragile, but tenacious. We humans must not let our ego fool us into believing that we are important in the life of species, to the course of this planet, to energy balances that involve orders of magnitude more energy and more factors than we can ever hope to influence. We must keep ourselves humble, do what makes sense, not what seems grandiose and magnanimous. Grandiose and magnanimous typically lead to more harm than good. It is very important to keep in mind that, given only the natural order, all species are doomed. Of every 1,000 species that have ever existed on this planet, only one survives. Can it be considered a tragedy to lose one more? And (as pointed out in comments), let us never quite asking, “Where are the corpses?” as Mr. Eschenbach has pointed out.

Good article, and good comments below it. For me, it is wise for us humans to remember our place. We also must remember that time and space are too big for us to condense into images that fit nicely in our daily lives. We cannot assume. We must keep in mind that life is fragile, […]

View original post

%d bloggers like this: