M. (hristine

Unless you can provide compelling evidence to the contrary (and you cant, because, outside of the cottage conspiracy industry, none exists), the UN is doing (more or less) precisely what it was established to do, from wikipedia (I know I know, the New World Orderers have their hands all over that site, but maybe take your foil cap off for a second and like, humor me):

 

“…it is primarily associated with the ideological notion of global governance only in the sense of new collective efforts to identify, understand, or address worldwide problems that go beyond the capacity of individual states to solve.”

 

So, when you view a statement such as this through the preceding lens, it is stripped of its menace, which is not to suggest I find it menacing, I’m talking in your terms.

 

 

 

The idea that the US is somehow (or in growing danger of becoming) subservient to the UN is absurd, and simply not supported by the facts.

 

Whether or not you believe in climate change, we would be extremely fucking wise to do everything within our power to conserve, conserve and then conserve some fucking more, the earth’s remaining petroleum reserves, cause, when it’s gone, it’s gone, and it ain’t coming back – well, it will, eventually perhaps, but when it does, we along with lots of other organic matter might serve as its source. Many credible folks within the petroleum industry have indicated that we’ve already passed peak (oil), or, if not, we will within the very near future. Our entire civilization is entirely dependent on petroleum, and not just petroleum, but cheap and (relatively) easy access to it. As of today, we do not have a replacement, at least nothing that comes even remotely close to providing a viable alternative, one (or more) that will provide a similar bang for the buck, so to speak, as petroleum. Our entire infrastructure rests upon continued access to it. Alternatives are in their infancy, and time is running short.

 

The following article written by James Kunstler, though, on the whole, maybe a little too hyperbolic, is a good place to start.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/7203633/the_long_emergency

Say amen somebody.

I agree entirely that climate change is not a trend or even a political tool, but instead a natural reality of a complex planet. What we do not know, and do not have established data on, is how our recent consumption trends will affect, not affect, or override the planet's natural systems. I think it is natural, healthy, and smart to keep a close watch on these trends and even err on the side of caution.

A basic tenent of Buddhism is pratītyasamutpāda, or dependent co-arising. The environmental model only scratches the surface of how complex is Indra's web.

I see literally tons of food thrown into the dumpster every day at the grocery where I work. I can't even imagine the resources wasted in growing, packaging and shipping food that ends up to poison even more. This is one store. There is something intrinsically wrong in a culture that functions this way. Record snowfall which may or may not be caused by global warming or perhaps sunspot activity is the least of my worries.

I think if you boil down the position to "Pollution is bad, it harms the environment, and we need to do much less of it" then there is not much to argue with. If we get caught up in arguing over whether we need to look at the weather over 10 years or 100 years or just the temperature today, it sort of skirts the main point: We need to pollute less, period.

This

Wow, that geologist sure has a lot of aliases on a lot of blog posts.

Dr. Francis Manns. I like a grumpy naysayer thrown into the mix every now and again.

To those who think it's as simple as "since it's snowing a lot, climate change is a hoax", I wonder what does an unseasonably warm day mean?

(Not asking anyone here, really. I just always wonder that.)

It means that climate is wildly variable and unpredictable. I am very comfortable with a multiple working hypothesis on this subject. The Farmers Almanac called for an unusually harsh and wet winter due to sunspot activity.

"The third ranking gas is CO2 (0.0383%), and it does not correlate well with global warming or cooling either; in fact, CO2 in the atmosphere trails warming which is clear natural evidence for its well-studied inverse solubility in water: CO2 dissolves rapidly in cold water and bubbles rapidly out of warm water. CO2 has been rising and Earth and her oceans have been warming. However, the correlation trails.

Svensmark of the Danish National Space Center has experiments scheduled for the Hadron collider to test his basement experiment. Elevated solar flux (> 10 protons per cc) appears to cause fog in the Great Lakes and clouds too. The hypothesis of the Danish National Space Center goes as follows: quiet sun allows the geomagnetic shield to drop. Incoming galactic cosmic ray flux creates more low-level clouds, more snow, and more albedo effect as more is heat reflected resulting in a colder climate. An active sun has an enhanced magnetic field that induces Earth’s geomagnetic shield response. Earth has fewer low-level clouds, less rain, snow and ice, and less albedo (less heat reflected) producing a warmer climate.

That is how the bulk of climate change likely works, coupled with (modulated by) sunspot peak frequency there are cycles of global warming and cooling like waves in the ocean. When the waves are closely spaced, all the planets warm; when the waves are spaced farther apart, as they have been for this century, all the planets cool.

Many answers yield many new questions: the change in cloud cover is only a small percentage, and the ultimate cause of the solar magnetic cycle may be cyclicity in the Sun-Jupiter centre of gravity. We await more on that.

Although the post 60s warming period appears to be over, warming and attendant humidity have allowed the principal green house gas, water vapour, to kick in with more clouds, rain and snow depending on where you live to provide the negative feedback that scientists use to explain the existence of complex life on Earth for 550 million years. We can likely kick much of the carbon economy sometime late the twenty-first century, but we must not rush to judgement for the wrong reason. The planet heats and cools naturally and our gasses are the thermostat. Nothing unusual is going on except for the Orwellian politics. In other words, it is not the heat; it is the humidity."

It's not the heat, it's the humidity.

I saw new Ted Leo leaked this AM.

really? i love the new glossary album. maybe not as much as the last one but definitly like it.

Yeah, I like it quite a bit. Surprised you didn't like it mChris. Nothing compares to For What I Don't Become for me but I like it quite a bit. That said, I think his recent solo album grabbed me even more so.

OK. I just played Thin Lizzy The Boys Are Back In Town, interspersed with Save Your Money For The Weekend. Had the same reaction. I still love the Kneisers' vocals and harmonies, but to me, all those great hooks have gotten lost in the production. I'll give it another listen in the car though. There's too much to love about this band to give up on them now.

Also...been meaning to snag Joey's free download for a while. Thanks for the reminder!

When did all these guys decide they needed to morph into 70s arena rock bands? I'm sad, blue. Much of this album sounds like Thin Lizzy.

If anyone sees Sin Ropas Holy Broken floating around could you please PM?

No way.

 

http://www.beck.com/record_club

 

Dixie Beach Promenade - Senior Tweedy on vocals, Junior Tweedy on drums, Beck & Mikael & Pat on Synths, Lidell on backups.

My daughter is a Beck zealot. And a drummer. She has given me daily updates to this project. After we watched this one together:

Sarah: See what I mean about how expressionless Spencer is?

M (hris: Maybe he is overwhelmed playing behind such amazing musicians.

Sarah: He's such a good drummer. I think he is underwhelmed with the simplicity of his drum part.

M (hris:

Seconded. I actually like a lot of this better than most of what's on the last couple Wilco studio releases. Jeff sounds really relaxed, and the collaboration with Feist works well too, IMHO.

Yep.

In keeping with (W)TF's mention of Goebbels,,,

Though it seems you are looking for filmmakers of political criticism, I find the propaganda films of Leni Riefenstahl particularly interesting.

Liberty Hall in Lawrence is a small, accoustically superior venue. Last time the whole band was here the set was breathtaking, but cut short due to the intoxication level of the drummer.

This could be an interesting show.

I wonder if he will play any Sigur Ros songs and what kind of backing band if any he will have?

From his email today:

The tour will feature a brand new band and a stage set designed by 59

Productions, bringing together the worlds of theatre and music in a

new and hopefully unique way.

free speech

 

This has become an oxymoron.

Happy birthday Mike! I hope you have a great day and a superb year!

The Court decided issues of constitutional law, not right or wrong. I understand your concerns, but the Court's one and only job is to interpret laws and their allegiance to our Constitution.

 

 

I made no mention of it being "right or wrong."

If this case was as clear cut an interpretation of the constitution as you're positing here, it would have been a unanimous vote.

When the evolution of law begins with a questionable premise, in this case the personhood of a corporation, all that arises from that is going to be somewhat bent.* Some would say that the definition of personhood is the crux of the Roe v Wade debate as well.

 

Alito responded in a way that hinted at allegiance to what? His own decision? I see nothing wrong with this. It may have been a breach of etiquette, but it could have been avoided if President Obama truly showed deference to separation of powers and saved his criticism for the decision for a speech that didn't have the members of the Court sitting 20 feet away from him while they were surrounded by a group of people who would stand in approval of his words against them.

Leo made the logical progression better than I could:

 

 

Apparently, the promotion of corporate interests by funding candidates through PACs was not enough for this court. It has an agenda and took this opportunity to further its agenda rather than adhere to its pose of judicial restraint. Thus, the court took a political approach in its review of the case.

 

waived any hint of impartiality and became defensive, showing it was personal and, as such, political.

Again, I am not in a twist about the drama that played out in the SOTU address, I'm thankful for it. In fact I thought it was particularly awesome. For the furthering the dialogue, and for pulling aside the curtain revealing the true identity of the judge standing behind it.

* Edited to add: The Oxford English Dictionary defines corporation as a group of people

authorized to act as an individual. I guess that is the legal definition as well?

Yet...

These influences came together in the body of canon law built

around the conception of the church as corporate structure in the

Middle Ages. Different theories of the church as corporate body

were favored by different individuals but all agreed on one key

component: that the church was more than just its members and

could maintain an existence perpetually, regardless of the death of

any individual member.

 

Obama could have very easily and tactfully expressed his feelings about corporate speech in the election arena without making such a pointed attack on the decision, and I think the much ado being made about alito's reaction is silly.

 

 

As I am not an attorney, my opinion on Constitutional law is irrelevant. As a citizen however I am very concerned about the implications of this decision. I want this on the forefront of Americans' minds.

The court was called out, and Alito responded in a way that hinted at allegiance. It was a dramatic moment.

Americans forget about things unless there is drama attached. Silly? Perhaps. But that drama revived this thread and hopefully put the spotlight back on the questionable decision rendered by this court.

Thank you, Leo. I heart you.

Ditto.

Congratulations!

The way I see it, Obama checked the Supreme Court, and Alito balanced his ass.

 

Holy shit! Checks and balances!

And what I was trying to say was that I view that participation as about as distasteful as Alito's move. But as I've said, I think the judges' presence is meant to be (and ought to be) primarily symbolic and removed from the partisan (because it is) participation.

Maybe.

My idea is more that there is a context. Obama said things within a context. Alito responded within a context. Sometimes a breach of protocol (which both participated in) is required. I liked seeing the color of their stripes.

It engenders dialogue. The dialogue moves us forward.

In the larger context, these are good things.

Good lord, don't even get me started on applause. I loathe applause (in general, not just at these events) to the bone.

My opinion was not whether the applause is good or bad, simply that the SOTU address is participatory.

Since when is the State of the Union address a conversation? Or do I misunderstand the use of the word, "address?"

If it was pure "address" there would be no laudatory applause during the body of the speech.

I got no problem with Alito's commentary, whether I agree with the ruling or not. Democracy is dialogue

I like cut to the chase communication. I wish there was more of it.

I love you.