T-Minus ONE Day!!!
Well, it's finally here. After all the planning, scheming, and large sums of cash it is my last day before I leave to go flog a foreign bike in a foreign country, drink some good German beer, see some beautiful countryside, eat some good food, make some new friends and check out some hot chickie babes.
I had started to realize how burned out on work I was when I finally had a "normal" week. It was the first "normal" week I had in about a year. I haven't really taken a good vacation in about four or five years. It's been seven years since I have been overseas. Things have changed a lot since then. The world has moved on. I have moved on. But I am still looking forward to it.
So I've got my money (both traveler's checks and cash), my passport, and my bags all packed up. If it wasn't for my bike gear I think I could get away with one backpack, but it's better to be safe than sorry.
I do have a few disappointments:
I won't be here to spend time with my dad on Father's Day (tomorrow). HAPPY FATHER'S DAY to all you dad's out there, including mine!
and
none of my friends are able to go with me on this particular adventure.
But....like I said, I'll be taking along several of you in spirit. I've already been asked to yell out a few friend's names in the pubs in Germany. I can just see them now: "Look at that crazy American. He just yells out random names every few minutes and drinks his beer!! And what is a 'Grasshopper?'"
BTW - I don't have everyone's address for post cards. Please do NOT post them on here unless you want some crazy person to hunt you down for knowing me. If you want a post card, email me and I'll try to get one in the mail for you. I think there is a link to my personal email on here. Otherwise, keep watching the blog for pics and updates!
Saturday, June 17, 2006
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
The Reaction To Gore's Movie
Thanks to my friend, Bling!, for sending me this link from Canada Free Press. It is a response to the new Gore film (which I still have not gotten to see, yet).
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom HarrisMonday, June 12, 2006
"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."
This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.
So we have a smaller fraction.
But it becomes smaller still. Among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not "predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."
We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.
Here is a small sample of the side of the debate we almost never hear:
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and "hundreds of other studies" reveal: on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."
Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."
But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.
The Antarctica has survived warm and cold events over millions of years. A meltdown is simply not a realistic scenario in the foreseeable future.
Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."
Karlén explains that a paper published in 2003 by University of Alaska professor Igor Polyakov shows that, the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise. "For several published records it is a decrease for the last 50 years," says Karlén
Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. gives the details, "There has been some decrease in ice thickness in the Canadian Arctic over the past 30 years but no melt down. The Canadian Ice Service records show that from 1971-1981 there was average, to above average, ice thickness. From 1981-1982 there was a sharp decrease of 15% but there was a quick recovery to average, to slightly above average, values from 1983-1995. A sharp drop of 30% occurred again 1996-1998 and since then there has been a steady increase to reach near normal conditions since 2001."
Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."
Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."
In April sixty of the world's leading experts in the field asked Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake - either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents - it seems like a reasonable request.
Tom Harris is mechanical engineer and Ottawa Director of High Park Group, a public affairs and public policy company.
Thanks to my friend, Bling!, for sending me this link from Canada Free Press. It is a response to the new Gore film (which I still have not gotten to see, yet).
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom HarrisMonday, June 12, 2006
"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."
This is highly valuable knowledge, but doesn't make them climate change cause experts, only climate impact experts.
So we have a smaller fraction.
But it becomes smaller still. Among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not "predictions" but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."
We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.
Here is a small sample of the side of the debate we almost never hear:
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
Patterson concluded his testimony by explaining what his research and "hundreds of other studies" reveal: on all time scales, there is very good correlation between Earth's temperature and natural celestial phenomena such changes in the brightness of the Sun.
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, former marine researcher at the Geological Survey of Finland and professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, takes apart Gore's dramatic display of Antarctic glaciers collapsing into the sea. "The breaking glacier wall is a normally occurring phenomenon which is due to the normal advance of a glacier," says Winterhalter. "In Antarctica the temperature is low enough to prohibit melting of the ice front, so if the ice is grounded, it has to break off in beautiful ice cascades. If the water is deep enough icebergs will form."
Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden, admits, "Some small areas in the Antarctic Peninsula have broken up recently, just like it has done back in time. The temperature in this part of Antarctica has increased recently, probably because of a small change in the position of the low pressure systems."
But Karlén clarifies that the 'mass balance' of Antarctica is positive - more snow is accumulating than melting off. As a result, Ball explains, there is an increase in the 'calving' of icebergs as the ice dome of Antarctica is growing and flowing to the oceans. When Greenland and Antarctica are assessed together, "their mass balance is considered to possibly increase the sea level by 0.03 mm/year - not much of an effect," Karlén concludes.
The Antarctica has survived warm and cold events over millions of years. A meltdown is simply not a realistic scenario in the foreseeable future.
Gore tells us in the film, "Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap." This is misleading, according to Ball: "The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period. The 1990 runs were done in the warmer month of September, using a wholly different technology."
Karlén explains that a paper published in 2003 by University of Alaska professor Igor Polyakov shows that, the region of the Arctic where rising temperature is supposedly endangering polar bears showed fluctuations since 1940 but no overall temperature rise. "For several published records it is a decrease for the last 50 years," says Karlén
Dr. Dick Morgan, former advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and climatology researcher at University of Exeter, U.K. gives the details, "There has been some decrease in ice thickness in the Canadian Arctic over the past 30 years but no melt down. The Canadian Ice Service records show that from 1971-1981 there was average, to above average, ice thickness. From 1981-1982 there was a sharp decrease of 15% but there was a quick recovery to average, to slightly above average, values from 1983-1995. A sharp drop of 30% occurred again 1996-1998 and since then there has been a steady increase to reach near normal conditions since 2001."
Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."
Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."
In April sixty of the world's leading experts in the field asked Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake - either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents - it seems like a reasonable request.
Tom Harris is mechanical engineer and Ottawa Director of High Park Group, a public affairs and public policy company.
An Email From A Friend
Here is an email from a friend of mine. I got a good laugh out of it:
Hey you twisted fucker -
ONLY YOU could make packing bags a logistical issue~!
You a a truly pathetic GEEK !
all true....except the "pathetic" part. OK, maybe that is true. what can I say?
Are you laying out ALL of your items and "checking them off" on your SPREADSHEET ? LOL !
I do have a checklest, but no spreadsheet.
Probably... I find it hilarious how "meticolous" you can be...
I'm sure they meant meticulous. But yeah, I'm pretty anal at times.
Personally - I would have done the spreadsheet last week !
- had the load already analyzed, weighed and balanced,
- all items tagged with their spreadsheet line item marked in indelible ink
- plus an RFID tag in place for easier accounting.
That's a good thought..... but you forgot to cross reference the serial tags with the spreadsheet on a PDA / Blackberry and some asset tracking so that you would immediately know if everything was accountable.
You are carrying "bluetooth " with you - correct? You should therefore be able to cobble together a scanner with no trouble.
Nope! I do not have a bluetooth device. I am really not a gadget freak.
And WHAT ABOUT spare parts for your scooter???
We expect to see the 18 wheeler already in Europe on the ground !
MY bike is staying right here in good 'ol Hotter Than Hell Texas. I am renting a BMW. If you weren't such an old bastard you would have been able to read that already. Get with the program.
Get with it Bud !
Oh, and we do EXPECT daily updates of your travels...
Of course!
Here is an email from a friend of mine. I got a good laugh out of it:
Hey you twisted fucker -
ONLY YOU could make packing bags a logistical issue~!
You a a truly pathetic GEEK !
all true....except the "pathetic" part. OK, maybe that is true. what can I say?
Are you laying out ALL of your items and "checking them off" on your SPREADSHEET ? LOL !
I do have a checklest, but no spreadsheet.
Probably... I find it hilarious how "meticolous" you can be...
I'm sure they meant meticulous. But yeah, I'm pretty anal at times.
Personally - I would have done the spreadsheet last week !
- had the load already analyzed, weighed and balanced,
- all items tagged with their spreadsheet line item marked in indelible ink
- plus an RFID tag in place for easier accounting.
That's a good thought..... but you forgot to cross reference the serial tags with the spreadsheet on a PDA / Blackberry and some asset tracking so that you would immediately know if everything was accountable.
You are carrying "bluetooth " with you - correct? You should therefore be able to cobble together a scanner with no trouble.
Nope! I do not have a bluetooth device. I am really not a gadget freak.
And WHAT ABOUT spare parts for your scooter???
We expect to see the 18 wheeler already in Europe on the ground !
MY bike is staying right here in good 'ol Hotter Than Hell Texas. I am renting a BMW. If you weren't such an old bastard you would have been able to read that already. Get with the program.
Get with it Bud !
Oh, and we do EXPECT daily updates of your travels...
Of course!
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
.jpg)
More Europe Stuff - Still Getting Ready
So my plan is to grab the maps that were sent to me, along with the tour book, and highlight my routes. Should be simple, right? WRONG!! I have already discovered that the German's do not call their towns the same thing that we do. As an example, Munich is spelled on the map as "Munchen." How am I, as an American supposed to know that? American's are horrible at geography and I am no exception to that rule.
As you can see here, I had people on the phone, my laptop out (for Google Earth), the tour book, highlighters and everything else. This was only the FIRST day in which there were no alternate routes. All the other days I have to figure out the primary as well as the alternate routes. This simple task for only the first day took me over an hour. I am going to have to get on the stick if I want to have them all done by the time I leave.
The finished product with a highlighted route.....
T-Minus 5 Days and Counting!!
Well it's almost time to go to Europe. I started the process of thinking of what I wanted to take and how to pack it quite some time ago. Today, I experimented with how to pack all of my bike gear. It didn't quite turn out the way I wanted, but I think it will work nicely. I am constrained on my trip to the chase vehicle only carrying two bags per person. I want to have a gear bag, my clothes bag, and of course....my laptop and electronics so I can stay in touch. That's three bags. But.....if I can figure out a while to put one bag into another while in between stops then I am set.
So what all is here? Try this: 
Full Set of Racing Leathers
Wind Stopper Suite (leathers are perforated)
Sidi Motorcycle Boots
Winter Gloves
Summer Glovers
Rain Suit
Helmet
Secondary Textile Jacket
Penlight
Leatherman
Thermals
And that is just for riding my bike!!! I have to have far more stuff since I can't just come back to the casa and grab something if I need it. I wanted this to all go in a small bag, but due to the armor in the jacket(s) and pants it wasn't going to happen that way. So what I ended up with was cramming it all into a large hard-shell suitcase. I am thinking that when I pull the majority of the gear out, I can fit my laptop / electronics back into this and that still gets me down to two bags.
So here is the carnage from trying to figure all this out, and how it ended up. I guess I'll just have to carry my helmet on the plane. BTW - I haven't even started on my clothing and electronic stuff, yet.
Monday, June 12, 2006
I Admit it, I was Wrong....Global Warming IS happening and is catastrophic!!! When I left Montana it was 53 degrees and raining. People were looking at me strange for wearing shorts and an athletic t-shirt. So I fly to TX through Chicago (mental note - don't ever do that again). My friends picked me up at the airport and we grab my bags. Then, the double-doors at the airport slide apart and OH MY GOD!!! It was liking walking into a blast furnace!!! The ambient temperature had cooled off to 98 degrees and it was almost 9:00 at night!!
So what do we do? Naturally we go to a bar / restaurant to get a drink and a bite to eat. The place was packed so people could watch some guys beat each others brains in (professional boxing). I could care less, but we sat outside because it was too packed to sit inside. Everyone was remarking on how "nice" it was out there? 93 degrees? Are you HIGH? My quesadilla was curling at the edges from continuing to cook on my plate. I had to suck down the beer far faster than usual to keep it from evaporating or boiling over.
Of course, we didn't stop partying until about 5:30am. Glad to know that I can count on my friends to get me home "early." Needless to say I was pretty darned worthless come Sunday. And now, I am getting into my Europe Trip Mode. Gotta start the staging process and all that. I got my new camera, so I'll be posting pics, soon!
I knew this would happen. I knew I would get too used to being in Montana and the TX summer would kill me. Thank goodness I am traveling to Europe at the end of the week. It will be nice and cool there. How did I ever stand it before?
Friday, June 09, 2006
Apparently This Thing Really is On!
I have been hearing through the grapevine that more people are reading this than I originally thought. I find that very amusing. I am glad to know that some of you out there get some sick and twisted enjoyment from it.
This is my last day in Montana until July 5th!!! I am soooooo stoked about going to Europe!!! Keep checking back for updates.
It's only 68 here, and it's 98 back in Texas. I think I am going to die.....
I have been hearing through the grapevine that more people are reading this than I originally thought. I find that very amusing. I am glad to know that some of you out there get some sick and twisted enjoyment from it.
This is my last day in Montana until July 5th!!! I am soooooo stoked about going to Europe!!! Keep checking back for updates.
It's only 68 here, and it's 98 back in Texas. I think I am going to die.....
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
I Want to Go Faster Than The Speed of Light!
And this is just the bike to do it with!! It's the Kawasaki ZX-14. The fastest production sport bike made. A "gentleman's" agreement of the manufacturers limits the top speed of the bike to 186mph. Yes, that is correct....you can roll one of these off the showroom floor and hit 186mph without modifications to the bike. Quarter mile times are in the low to mid 9's. All stock, and all under $12k.
....and I want one. I don't need one. Not anymore than some women crave chocolate, but I'd really like to have one. So now I have to figure out how much of that want will be transferred to greenbacks. Even the insurance wouldn't be any more (maybe less?) than what I pay today. And, if I buy it in Montana there is no state sales tax. Give me time and I'll figure out a way to talk myself into it.
Vertical Windows vs. Horizontal Blinds
Here in Montana a lot of the architecture uses vertical crank-out windows. That is, windows that are on a vertical axis and rotate outwards. This is great, this is fine. BUT....why do people install horizontal blinds on these things? If the wind is blowing in the blinds have to be all the way up or they "clack" back and forth and make a hell of a noise. Can't open the window to let the cool air in, or I have to have the blinds all the way up. This is not conducive to me getting any real rest.
Speaking of, yes, another night of dreaming. Very odd....
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
When Dream and Day Unite
That is actually a title from a band called Dream Theater. They are one of my favorite bands out there today. You probably haven't heard of them because they don't write music that is conducive to radio play. It's very progressive, and a bit on the heavier side. Each member of the band is incredible on their own and combined they write very interesting music.
So why is that the title of my blog today? Well, I had a dream last night. My dream was fairly sad, but that is not what is odd. What is odd is that I rarely dream on a level that I can remember that I even had a dream. I've read that everyone dreams every night, but that you may not remember them. This is true for me. However, I have had four or five very vivid dreams over the last week. Some good, some not so good. Considering I usually only have a dream about once a month this is highly unusual. So what gives? That is the question.....
a brief word on politics......
My intentions were not to get into political and religious debates on my own blog site. I am not a political poster and there are plenty of other sites that invite a good political debate. I don't care to argue politics most of the time. Politics, like religion, can ruin a good relationship and I find it very difficult to have a discussion with people without someone getting emotional. That doesn't mean that I think we shouldn't talk about it or try to ignore it.
Want to argue some politics? Here is my dad's blog, he's far more right-wing and conservative than I am but we do tend to agree on quite a few things:
http://politicalangstinamerica.blogspot.com
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Hi There!! My Feet are Green!
While that doesn't quite have the same impact as being in an elevator with a complete stranger and turning to them with a big grin on your face an announcing that you have on new socks, it probably got your attention!
Yes, my feet are green. I mowed the yard this morning with sandals on and the chlorophyll turned my toes and the bottoms of my feet green. I was industrious this morning. Yesterday I was at Home Depot grabbing a small item and there were people loading up their vehicles with all manners of tools, lumber, yard stuff, etc. I suddenly realized how much I miss working on my own house. Of course I complained about mowing the yard from time to time and all that, but now I miss not having those little things to fill my day up.
So this morning I got up and stained the back deck. Then I mowed and edged the yard (I don't think it has ever been edged). Now I feel better at least.
What to do with the rest of the day? I feel a big nap coming on....
While that doesn't quite have the same impact as being in an elevator with a complete stranger and turning to them with a big grin on your face an announcing that you have on new socks, it probably got your attention!
Yes, my feet are green. I mowed the yard this morning with sandals on and the chlorophyll turned my toes and the bottoms of my feet green. I was industrious this morning. Yesterday I was at Home Depot grabbing a small item and there were people loading up their vehicles with all manners of tools, lumber, yard stuff, etc. I suddenly realized how much I miss working on my own house. Of course I complained about mowing the yard from time to time and all that, but now I miss not having those little things to fill my day up.
So this morning I got up and stained the back deck. Then I mowed and edged the yard (I don't think it has ever been edged). Now I feel better at least.
What to do with the rest of the day? I feel a big nap coming on....
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Burning a Hole in My Boxers.....
Ok folks, I just couldn't resist any longer. I know that I already made two lengthy posts today but here is another one for you.
Gore is releasing his new film and it focuses on Global Warming. I saw the trailer for this at the movie theater and noticed that even in the trailer there are multiple inaccuracies and outright lies. Now, if you believe in Global Warming then good for you. Some people on drugs believe that they can fly but that doesn't keep them out of the hospital after a 3rd floor leap off the balcony.
What I don't believe in is Global Warming as an event that is happening. I don't believe in using this as a fear tactic, or for political leverage, but that is happening. I DO believe that our climate is changing. I also believe that mankind has the potential to have a profound impact on our environment and that we should study this more closely. Becoming aware of how we impact our environment is not a bad thing. If you can admit that you believe in Global Warming, but don't know any of the science to back it up then you are one step closer to not being a "sheeple."
Credible scientist are aware that we cannot possibly and accurately predict climate change and what impact it has on our environment. Remember the predictions of Gore and his team during the time of the Kyoto Treaty? Does it surprise you to look back on that and realize that none of those predictions came true?
Read on if you dare...... here are the things you will not hear about from people that advocate Global Warming.
Myth 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.
Fact: For the atmosphere as a whole, accurate satellite, balloon and long-term mountain top measurements have observed no increase at all.
Average ground station readings show a mild warming over the last 100 years, but well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. Further, the majority of stations are located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands") which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").
To further emphasize this the city of NY has increased in temperature (though surprisingly very little) while Syracuse the temperature has decreased. They are only about 200 miles apart.
Myth 2: The “hockey stick” graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature increase for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.
Fact: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 100to 120000 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average" global temperature has been rising at a rate of 0.6 to 0.8 degrees Celsius per 100 years; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare. The hockey stick not only ignores historical fact, but is also scientifically flawed. The guy who wrote the algorithm admittedly injected information to skew the data.
Myth 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus warming the earth.
Fact: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. The CO2 increase was only 0.4% over the last 50 years, rather than the 5% per 100 years quoted by Kyoto. However, as measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this. There is solid evidence that as temperatures rise naturally and cyclically, the earth naturally produces more CO2 as a result.
Myth 4: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas.
Fact: Water vapor or clouds, which makes up on average about 3 % of the atmosphere, is the major greenhouse gas. CO2 makes up only about 3% of the greenhouse gases, or about 0.03% of the atmosphere. Moreover, because of its molecular weight and absorptive capacity, water vapor is 3000 times more effective than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention this important fact.
Myth 5: Computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming.
Fact: Unfortunately, computer models predicting global warming are incapable of including the effects of the sun and the clouds. Further, the main cause of temperature variation is the sun. Its radiation changes all the time, partly in cyclical fashion. The number of sunspots can be correlated very closely with average temperatures on earth, e.g. the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. Varying intensity of solar heat radiation affects the surface temperature of the oceans and the currents. Warmer ocean water expels gases, some of which is CO2.
Myth 6: The UN proved that man–made CO2 causes global warming.
Fact: In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:
- “None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.”
- “No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to ………..man–made causes”
Myth 7: CO2 is a pollutant.
Fact: This is absolutely not true. In fact, CO2 is essential to life on earth. It is necessary for plant growth and its intake causes many trees and other plants to grow more vigorously.
Myth 8: Global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.
Fact: There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that supports such claims Growing insurance and infrastructure repair costs, particularly in coastal areas, are sometimes claimed to be the result of increasing frequency and severity of storms, whereas in reality they are a function of increasing population density and escalating development value.
Myth 9: Receding glaciers and the calving of ice shelves are proof of global warming.
Fact: Glaciers have been receding for hundreds of years; thatÂ’s because we are still coming out of the very cool period of the Little Ice Age. Ice shelves have been breaking off for centuries. Scientists know of at least 33 periods of glaciers growing and then retreating. ItÂ’s normal.
Myth 10: The earth’s poles are warming; polar ice caps are breaking up and melting and the sea level rising.
Fact: The earth is variable. The western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer, but the eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder. The small Palmer Peninsula of Antarctica is getting warmer, while the main Antarctic continent is actually cooling.
So now I am done for the day. I think I have posted enough. I hope that you are enlightened and will go find the answers for yourself.
To My Friends.....Most of the people that should read this probably never will. Who are my friends? I am not talking about about aquaintences, or people I just hang out with every now and then. I am referring to my true friends, some of whom are no longer around to talk to. How do you know if you are that person? You just know....without having to be told.
My friends are the ones that:
- i have laughed with
- i have cried with
- gotten completely hosed with
- looked at the stars and questioned life and the rest of mankinds existence in the universe
- kicked my ass when I needed it (and sometimes when I didn't)
- pushed my buttons to see how far they could take it before I lost it
- were there for me when I really needed it
- ran from the cops with
- got me in trouble just to see me squirm
- put up with my idosyncronies
- put up with my sometimes unfounded emotional behavior
- listened to me when I thought they should hear something
- ...continued to listen to me even though they thought I was full of crap
- embarrassed the crap out of me if they could get away with it
- challenged me intellectualy
- challenged me phsyicaly
- challenged me competitively
- challenged me emotionaly
- challenged me spiritiualy
- acted like little kids with regardless of who else was around to see it
- laughed at me when I acted like a fool or did something stupid - hopefully I was laughing too!
- shared their thoughts and feeling with me
- asked me for my advice or opinion - and sometimes even followed it
- and on...and on...and on.
In any case, like I said....you just know without having to be told. Should I ever depart this earth unexpectedly just know that I loved you and appreciated you (and no I am not gay!!! only a friend would give me shit about that).
You'll Love It!
It Looks Just Like A Telefunken U47!
Is this thing on? Is anyone listening? That's the one thing I don't like about this site. Unlike other web portals, there is no way to tell if people are actually visiting and reading what you have going on. Not that I really care, I'll blab away regardless....but curiosity did kill the cat, after all. And speaking of, if your are a curious type person please check this out!
In the last week I have been chastised by two different women on my approach to women. Not that I said anything nearly as derogatory as when I had a conversation at a bar with a chick and she said you really shouldn't call women "chicks." OK, fine. When I was relaying that story to a friend's girlfriend she laughed and asked me who said this....."some chick," I replied. And if you find that offensive, then you might not ever want to ask me my opinion on anything.....
Irregardless of that, I was told that I was entirely too logical in dealing with women. Does that sound a bit off? Is that to imply that women are not logical? So what if you know women that are definitively logical?
One person actually told me I should get drunk, make my move, and if it didn't work out then I could fall back to blaming the alcohol. As much as I like the idea, it just isn't quite my style. The worst thing for me is for other females to tell me things like:
- you should be rolling it
- you are a great guy
- you are good looking
- you should be able to get just about any woman you want
- etc.
Really? My, my, how I find that highly amusing and extremely frustrating. I don't want to hear that. Why does it irritate me? Because if any of it were true I would be exploring far more meaningful relationships than those with my guitar.
Admittedly I don't ask a lot of women out. I don't like rejection and it seems that more often than not that is what happens. I also don't play games, and I think this is the single largest problem. I speak my mind, when asked or provoked, and I refuse to fall into any of the following games (life is too short):
- any type of relationship based on how much I make or social status.
- women that think they hold all the power because they have something between their legs that makes them special.
- any psychological games that involve proving who is in control.
I have often been told I am unapproachable. WTF does that mean? How am I unapproachable? I'll talk to just about anyone on just about any subject (though I do tend to shy away from politics and religion as a general rule of thumb). When asked why people say that I never get a good answer.
And let's not even get into the whole traveling / where the hell do I really live type thing. That is a complete mess.
This could go on for a while, but in reality I am just ranting a bit.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)