Contingency Plans

When things don't go as planned, human nature, intelligence, and being itself requires that we adapt and react with optimism and hope. Otherwise, we can quickly find ourselves in a nihilistic spiral (indeed, just look at nations/regions of the world where Secular Humanism has taken firm roots and the correlation of suicide).

In the spirit of this optimism--particularly for those who have seen that for the first time in American history one will be forced to purchase something just for the privilege of being a citizen--I post a contingency plan from yesteryear.

When the first men walked on the moon, they didn't know if they would return.  We know that it works out in the end, but this memo

Politics and Heated Topics (Part 2)

New York! He was found in New York!
Op-Ed Contributor - We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change - NYTimes.com
Following the recent news that global warming has not been accurately presented to the public (i.e. the outcomes were predetermined and the data was skewed to show likewise), Al Gore has been located. He is fine.  In fact, he even had time to write a piece for the N.Y. Times. Moreover, 'What's a few mistakes?' seems to be the motivation for his Op-Ed. He assures us that, "the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged."  Read: plan on increased, expensive abridgments to your liberties even though the globe has not warmed in 15 years. We still assert that mankind is responsible guilty. This, in spite of world-class experts who can be found to disagree with me--experts who are actual scientists.

Mr. Gore: surely you are aware that Truth and Facts are two distinct things.  Facts can be presented as untruth (like, say, the DaVinci Code), and truth can be presented without facts (e.g. Dickens' A Christmas Carol).

Some questions: 1) If Humankind is guilty, to what Justice do you wish to appeal?  2) When has there ever been a 'consensus' in the history of objective science, particularly on an issue with this much variability (since a 'scientific consensus' is a contradiction of terms)? 3) When there have been consensii, haven't they occurred when those in authority dishonestly colluded to bring the masses under tyrannical control? 4) Have there ever been scandals in the Scientific Community where, for example, they find results because they need money?

***In my view, there is a natural cycle to the Earth.  The climate changes.  This is normal.  Scientists have observed evidence, gathered data, and documented trends supporting this history.  This is an equally plausible explanation (I argue a more plausible one) as the theory of AGW (anthropogenic global warming).  Further, some scientific explanations point to the probability that CO2 levels are a trailing indicator to temperature changes.  So, it seems suspect that mankind is having that significant of an impact, according to an objective reading of the evidence.  In spite of this, I am reading Al Gore's book to have a balanced perspective (a little late to the party, I know; many of the 'facts' have been disputed to cause what is asserted in his thesis, but I want to understand what he is saying anyhow.)***

The Art of Persuasion: How to get no one to agree with you

When talking with others and discussing any issue of merit and/or importance, there is usually a back and forth that goes on between people. For centuries these discourses have usually been peaceful and respectful, following certain unspoken rules of civility (of course, not all the time, but then those would often end in murder).

Mona Lisa Eyes

Lately, I have been compelled to engage Atheism more than usual. Either I am reading up on the latest 'findings' by prominent purveyors of pessimism or I am arguing for basic blocks of Reality with folks/friends/foes on Facebook. I find that this actually serves two functions for the Christian: