Please visit my other blog http://www.livingwithasnowman.blogspot.com/ and my NEW discussion blog at http://www.thehorseyouroadinon.blogspot.com





Sunday, August 19, 2012

A Gallimaufry

This is going to be a hodgepodge of thoughts (as you should have known from the title). But before I get into it I wanted to do some political stuff. But as I showed here - http://justsomeposts.blogspot.com/2012/01/reprise.html (this is a link to a post I did at the first of the year with links to some other political posts.) There, political posts done, except for some of the thoughts below.

I guess I am turning more and more into the crotchety old curmudgeon that will be running people off of the grass soon. I find myself getting so angry and perplexed at the "stuff" that is passed off as fact now in news, entertainment, and casual conversation. Now, I am not naive enough to think that everyone should think like me or even that these subjects are conclusively the way I see them. But, they are not conclusively the way they are presented. As I have stated here in many posts, (variations ) have been attributed to Goebbels, Hitler, Stalin, and various Chinese leaders) it is said if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes accepted a truth. This is what is happening on a lot of important issues today.

1) to me the biggest lie is the man-made global warming hoax. Now I know some of you just gasped (if you have not read many other of my posts - I have many on this subject - with links to proof of the hoax), that is how prevalent this idiocy has been ingrained into our national and global psyche. This is a perfect example of a lie told often and loudly until it is accepted. I am not going to cover all the ground I have in earlier posts (here is one - http://justsomeposts.blogspot.com/2011/10/on-soapbox-again.html ) , but here are a few facts.

     a) not all scientists believw the man-made global warming scam. It is presented as a universally accepted scientific fact, but that is far from the truth. There are famous, Nobel prize winning scientists that have publicly denounced this myth along with over 30,000 scientists that have signed a petition (check it out here - http://www.petitionproject.org/ ) against the presentation of anthropogenic global warming as a globally accepted fact.

     b) the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere does NOT track with any warming of the atmosphere. There have been MANY periods of time that the average global temperatures were much warmer than this as well as much cooler. Carbon dioxide does not track with this. The level of carbon dioxide has been increasing steadily and temperatures have not - even over the past decades.

     c) anthropogenic sources of carbon dioxide amount to about 3% of the output of the gas globally. I cannot believe the earth is so fragile that an additional 3% will shut down life as we know it. (FYI, I have seen figures as low as 2% for this and as high as 4% that is why I picked 3% - obviously it is a hard number to establish exactly)

     d) lastly on this one - why is it that our "carbon footprint" is so important, yet to resolve it all we have to do is pay money to buy "carbon credits" from someone. The amazing, wonderful Al Gore is involved with one such organization. As he and those like him fly around in their jets being met by their SUVs, all that we need to do to save the earth is pay them to "offset" our carbon dioxide output. This is such a crock that if you don't see it, I am not even going to try to explain it!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) one other "accepted" fact is that we are running out of crude oil and other natural hydrocarbons. Now, I realize that someday we may "run out" of oil. But, that day is far and away in the future. The proven known reserves in the ground today are TEN TIMES what they were in 1950 and DOUBLE what they were in 1970! That is PROVEN reserves - oil we know of with at least 90% certainty and can get with existing technology. If you add in the oil we now know in other forms, it is a LOT higher.  As for some predictions:

Before the first U.S. oil well was drilled in Pennsylvania in 1859, petroleum supplies were limited to crude oil that oozed to the surface. In 1855, an advertisement for Kier’ Rock Oil advised

consumers to “hurry, before this wonderful product is depleted from Nature’ laboratory.”

In 1874, the state geologist of Pennsylvania, the nation’s leading oil producing state, estimated that only enough U.S. oil remained to keep the nation’s kerosene lamps burning for four years



The 1973 Arab oil embargo gave rise to renewed claims that the world’s oil supply would be exhausted shortly. “The Oil Crisis: This Time the Wolf Is Here,” warned an article in the influential journal Foreign Affairs  geologists had cried wolf many times, acknowledged the authors of a respected and widely used textbook on economic geology in 1981; "finally, however the wolves are with us." The authors predicted that the U.S. was entering an incipient 125-year-long “energy gap,” projected to be at its worst shortly after the year 2000.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) how about the one where salt is bad for you? Did you know you would die without an intake of sodium (one of the two components of table salt)? Did you know that there are many seniors in controlled living environments that are possibly suffering from mental problems like dementia due to a sodium deficiency? Now, the average American gets WAY too much salt in their diets to ever worry about this. But, salt is not necessarily evil. Salt CAN contribute to high blood pressure. If you remember your science classes, you should have learned about osmosis and equilibrium. If you take in a lot of sodium your body will retain water to equalize the sodium content of the blood and bodily fluids. This can cause an increase in blood volume as well as  pressure on capillaries which can raise blood pressure. However, the degree to which this occurs varies greatly by individual. I was diagnosed with high blood pressure when I was 16. I have been on many medications, and done many diets. I can tell you that I am not overly reactive to sodium as far as my blood pressure goes. I have been on an very low sodium diet with no change to my blood pressure. I have "pigged out" on sodium laden foods with no spike in blood pressure. Too much salt is bad, but so is too little.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) I know from statistics I get that these long posts do not get read as much. But I have one more.
Cholesterol. Almost as big an evil as our carbon footprint. Did you know you would die without cholesterol? Did you know that cholesterol was so important to bodily functions that you have a system to produce it? ( as we do Vitamin D - amazing we are finding out it is important). Your brain is made up of a lot of lipids (fat). A large portion of that is cholesterol. Why do we spend so much time and effort in trying to reduce this in our body? I did a whole post on this with a lot of background - if you still care check it out here - http://justsomeposts.blogspot.com/2010/05/take-two-and-call-ambulance-in-morning.html

Hey even I am getting bored with this. Until next time - same bat time - same bat station!!





Saturday, August 4, 2012

39 states

I have soooooo much I want to comment on. (in fact, as I have said before - my lack of posts is usually not because I have nothing to say, but that I have too much to say) I am going to try to do a few posts to address these issues over the next week or so. I have decided to first comment on another timely issue, the Chick-Fil-A, gay marriage/rights issue.

I can sum up my thoughts in a few words - acceptance and tolerance are not the same as approval and support. Neither are disapproval and lack of support the same as hate and condemnation.

Although I said I could sum things up in those few words, you know there is more...

It seems that today if one does not take a position that totally and unequivocally supports a position of alternative lifestyle, you are a "hater", an uneducated dolt, or worse. You are subject to disdain and ridicule by those that have the position (typically a minority position/opinion) and in a majority of cases, by the established media. Our society is being taught that all manner of aberrant behavior is not only to be tolerated but embraced and approved. As I said above, I can accept and tolerate your beheading of chickens in the name of your religion. That does not mean I should have to approve and support it - or accept it as a normal activity. (I am not equating gay/lesbian activities with chicken decapitation, I am making a point using the ridiculous)

I have the point of view that if you want to have a sexual partner of the same sex, or set up a household with someone of the same sex; that is your business. But, as I (and most other heterosexuals) do not make a public display of my lifestyle and bedroom activities, neither should you. (parental warning - somewhat graphic phrasing coming up) If you want to go home at night and grease yourself and your mate up with Crisco and plug bratwurst in various orifices while fondling the genitals of gerbils - hey, keep it behind closed doors. (and watch out for the animal rights people). Also, unless I ask you specifically about your Crisco and gerbil usage - keep it to yourself.

I, as a majority of people have shown in every vote ever taken on the subject, do not support gay/lesbian marriage. I have no problem with gays/lesbians living together and having whatever sexual liaisons they desire (among consenting adults - and gerbils); but not marriage. Thirty-nine states have laws and/or a constitutional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. The Defense of Marriage Act at the federal level has done the same. Gay/lesbian activists would have you believe that the majority of people support marriages, but like I said - EVERY time it has come to a popular vote (even in that haven of "progressive" thought - California) it has been voted down. As much as a lot of people don't like to admit it, marriage (at least historically) is a religious ceremony. I know it can be performed in a totally civil setting now, but it is a religious based ceremony just the same. Marriage and the definition of same is based on one man and one woman. The rights and privileges applicable to those that enter into marriage should not be diminished by allowing them to be granted to anyone that uses the term marriage. There are financial and societal costs involved with widening the definition of marriage that I do not think people have thought through.

That brings us to freedom of speech. I have been appalled at the deterioration of this right over the past decade. This was one of the freedoms that the founders and writers of the Constitution believed was worth defining in no uncertain terms. As Americans, we have the constitutional right to say what we believe, even if it is hurtful, damning, bigoted, politically incorrect, or whatever. The only limits legally are that they be true (no slander or libel) and not endangering public welfare or safety (like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater we hear about) However, it has become the norm today to persecute and condemn anyone that makes a stupid or offensive statement. If the statement is made with conviction and belief, I believe it is their right to do so under the Constitution. Condemnation and/or punishment should be meted out by their peers and social group - not public opinion. Hurtful, bigoted, offensive statements are covered by the right of free speech as is politically correct speech.

Now to the specifics of the Chick-Fil-A statement. There was nothing hurtful in the statement by Mr. Cathy when he calmly and politely stated he supported the traditional definition of marriage. He said nothing derogatory about gays/lesbians except he did not support their right to marriage. That statement was turned into an example of "hate speech". It was condemned and vilified by all the "gay rights" activists and most media alike. It was presented as tantamount to a declaration of war on the gay/lesbian community. There was nothing in the statement that threatened the existence or even the lifestyle of that community. It was just a statement from an individual (with the authority of a large corporation that he and his family control, granted) that he did not support something that is illegal in thirty-nine states and by federal law anyway!

Tolerance and acceptance is something that needs to be studied and practiced by the gay/lesbian community and their supporters as well. I acknowledge your right to live your life the way you want as I want you to do for me. You should acknowledge my right to speak my mind on what I believe as I do for you. Tolerance cuts both ways.