Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Comment troll of the week - digg - on Atheists
hcharger 6 hr 34 min ago
http://goo.gl/v95vz
Atheists are the lowest form of humanity on this planet because they do not have a spiritual conscience to protect them even from themselves.
Most people who approve war are atheists. Most serial murderers are atheists. Most corporate businessmen who practice cheating millions from unsuspecting souls are atheist
When you practice atheism, you can commit anything imoral as an atheist has no concept of right and wrong. An atheist has a vision of hope within this lifetime only. A mere lifetime of a human is not the normal insight that all humans are created with. An atheist will destroy all concepts of God because in his/her fraile mind they beleve that there will be no accountability if they stay ignorant within the borders of divine standards.
Atheists are well educated, (as a rule) but their wisdom makes their knowledge foolish as they depend on theories that are fabricated in their imagination.
An atheist believes homosexuality is normal....ha ha ha ha! Atheists in all sense of the word can be categorized as sick, just as this system of things becomes more sick and corrupt with each passing year.
Thank goodness for obedient humans who see the positive effect that divine submission brings and thank goodness also that the God who created the heavens and the earth wll remove this corrupt system from the earth.
Good ridance homos, adios atheists, it hasn't been fun knowing you.
Now for the on-slaunght of defence from the lowlifes...take it away twinnies.
http://goo.gl/v95vz
Atheists are the lowest form of humanity on this planet because they do not have a spiritual conscience to protect them even from themselves.
Most people who approve war are atheists. Most serial murderers are atheists. Most corporate businessmen who practice cheating millions from unsuspecting souls are atheist
When you practice atheism, you can commit anything imoral as an atheist has no concept of right and wrong. An atheist has a vision of hope within this lifetime only. A mere lifetime of a human is not the normal insight that all humans are created with. An atheist will destroy all concepts of God because in his/her fraile mind they beleve that there will be no accountability if they stay ignorant within the borders of divine standards.
Atheists are well educated, (as a rule) but their wisdom makes their knowledge foolish as they depend on theories that are fabricated in their imagination.
An atheist believes homosexuality is normal....ha ha ha ha! Atheists in all sense of the word can be categorized as sick, just as this system of things becomes more sick and corrupt with each passing year.
Thank goodness for obedient humans who see the positive effect that divine submission brings and thank goodness also that the God who created the heavens and the earth wll remove this corrupt system from the earth.
Good ridance homos, adios atheists, it hasn't been fun knowing you.
Now for the on-slaunght of defence from the lowlifes...take it away twinnies.
Religion: USA Presidents: "not affiliated" or "religious views doubtful"
USA Presidents: "not affiliated" or "religious views doubtful"
James Madison, James Monroe, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, Zachary Taylor, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, Chester Arthur.
Thomas Paine (Deists)
Thomas Jefferson (Deists) - Episcopal Church, Unitarianism, and the religious philosophy of Deism. He believed that religion was an important prop for republican government. Important tenets of most deists were the denial of the Trinity and of miracles or the divinity of Jesus. Separation of church and state was a necessary reform of the religious "tyranny" whereby a religion received state endorsement, and those not of that religion were denied rights, and even punished.
Jefferson considered himself a deist; he also considered himself a follower of Jesus. This is not a contradiction, in Jefferson's view, because he believed Jesus to be merely human, not divine, and believed the precepts Jesus taught to be deistical. Much of traditional Christianity, Jefferson claimed, was error and corruption added by later followers of Jesus.
Jefferson was a strong supporter of the separation of church and state, believing that both government and religion would be strengthened by keeping each free of the corrupting influence of the other.
Thomas Jefferson and his Bible:
http://goo.gl/Q9bIy
The 'Jefferson Bible' was Thomas Jefferson's attempt to extract an authentic Jesus from the Gospel accounts.
Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents by Franklin Steiner (1936)
Thomas Jefferson, Freethinker
http://goo.gl/KL1j0
"From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians" tells the epic story of the rise of Christianity. The four hours explore the life and death of Jesus, and the men and women whose belief, conviction, and martyrdom created the religion we now know as Christianity.
http://goo.gl/67nus
James Madison and the Social Utility of Religion: Risks vs. Rewards
- James Hutson, Library of Congress
Thomas Jefferson overshadowed his close friend and coadjutor, James Madison, in many ways but in one, at least, Madison was demonstrably superior to his Monticello neighbor--in his ability to keep his religious views private. Despite a desire to be "most scrupulously reserved on the subject" of religion, Jefferson by the end of his life revealed more about his faith than any other founding father. He divulged so much about so sensitive a subject for one reason only: to defend himself against Federalist charges, broadcast in the election of 1800, that he was an atheist. http://goo.gl/paWcj
Misc:
"Nature's God", is typical Deist terminology
The Virginia General Assembly passed Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom:
"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity." -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" -- Thomas Jefferson letter to John Adams, Works, Vol. iv, p. 365
"If we could believe that he [Jesus] really countenanced the follies, the falsehoods, and the charlatanism which his biographers [Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John,] father on him, and admit the misconstructions, interpolations, and theorizations of the fathers of the early, and the fanatics of the latter ages, the conclusion would be irresistible by every sound mind that he was an impostor" -- Thomas Jefferson, Works, Vol. iv, p. 325
"The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God, like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs" -- Thomas Jefferson
The God of the Old Testament -- the God which Christians worship -- Jefferson pronounces "a being of terrific character -- cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust" (Works Vol. iv., p. 325).
The Religious Affiliation of Third U.S. President Thomas Jefferson
President Thomas Jefferson was a Protestant. Jefferson was raised as an Episcopalian (Anglican). He was also influenced by English Deists and has often been identified by historians as a Deist. He held many beliefs in common with Unitarians of the time period, and sometimes wrote that he thought the whole country would become Unitarian. He wrote that the teachings of Jesus contain the "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." Wrote: "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know." Source: "Jefferson's Religious Beliefs", by Rebecca Bowman, Monticello Research Department, August 1997 [URL: http://www.monticello.org/resources/interests/religion.html].
http://goo.gl/MIp4A
1787 Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson:
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth... Our sister states of Pennsylvania and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely. Religion is well supported; of various kinds, indeed, but all good enough; all sufficient to preserve peace and order: or if a sect arises, whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play, and reasons and laughs it out of doors, without suffering the state to be troubled with it. They do not hang more malefactors than we do. They are not more disturbed with religious dissensions. On the contrary, their harmony is unparalleled, and can be ascribed to nothing but their unbounded tolerance, because there is no other circumstance in which they differ from every nation on earth. They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them. Let us too give this experiment fair play, and get rid, while we may, of those tyrannical laws."
Richard Hildreth, the historian, in speaking of Jefferson's religious opinions, says:
"Jefferson's relations to the religious opinions of his country were somewhat peculiar. He believed, like Paine, in a personal God and a future life, but, like him, regarded Christianity, in the supernatural view of it, as a popular fable, an instrument for deluding, misgoverning and plundering mankind; and these opinions he entertained, as he did most others, with little regard to any qualifying considerations, and with an energy approaching to fanaticism. But he was no more inclined than were the New England Rationalists to become a martyr to the propagation of unpopular ideas. That he left to Paine and others of less discretion or more courage than himself." (History of the United States, vol. 5, p. 458 .
Src: http://goo.gl/KL1j0
Src: http://goo.gl/EHA8P
Src: http://goo.gl/0Jadi
Src: http://goo.gl/l4pMP
Src: http://goo.gl/Qt0QQ
Src: http://goo.gl/Q9bIy
Src: http://goo.gl/paWcj
James Madison, James Monroe, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, John Tyler, Zachary Taylor, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, Chester Arthur.
Thomas Paine (Deists)
Thomas Jefferson (Deists) - Episcopal Church, Unitarianism, and the religious philosophy of Deism. He believed that religion was an important prop for republican government. Important tenets of most deists were the denial of the Trinity and of miracles or the divinity of Jesus. Separation of church and state was a necessary reform of the religious "tyranny" whereby a religion received state endorsement, and those not of that religion were denied rights, and even punished.
Jefferson considered himself a deist; he also considered himself a follower of Jesus. This is not a contradiction, in Jefferson's view, because he believed Jesus to be merely human, not divine, and believed the precepts Jesus taught to be deistical. Much of traditional Christianity, Jefferson claimed, was error and corruption added by later followers of Jesus.
Jefferson was a strong supporter of the separation of church and state, believing that both government and religion would be strengthened by keeping each free of the corrupting influence of the other.
Thomas Jefferson and his Bible:
http://goo.gl/Q9bIy
The 'Jefferson Bible' was Thomas Jefferson's attempt to extract an authentic Jesus from the Gospel accounts.
Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents by Franklin Steiner (1936)
Thomas Jefferson, Freethinker
http://goo.gl/KL1j0
"From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians" tells the epic story of the rise of Christianity. The four hours explore the life and death of Jesus, and the men and women whose belief, conviction, and martyrdom created the religion we now know as Christianity.
http://goo.gl/67nus
James Madison and the Social Utility of Religion: Risks vs. Rewards
- James Hutson, Library of Congress
Thomas Jefferson overshadowed his close friend and coadjutor, James Madison, in many ways but in one, at least, Madison was demonstrably superior to his Monticello neighbor--in his ability to keep his religious views private. Despite a desire to be "most scrupulously reserved on the subject" of religion, Jefferson by the end of his life revealed more about his faith than any other founding father. He divulged so much about so sensitive a subject for one reason only: to defend himself against Federalist charges, broadcast in the election of 1800, that he was an atheist. http://goo.gl/paWcj
Misc:
"Nature's God", is typical Deist terminology
The Virginia General Assembly passed Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom:
"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity." -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" -- Thomas Jefferson letter to John Adams, Works, Vol. iv, p. 365
"If we could believe that he [Jesus] really countenanced the follies, the falsehoods, and the charlatanism which his biographers [Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John,] father on him, and admit the misconstructions, interpolations, and theorizations of the fathers of the early, and the fanatics of the latter ages, the conclusion would be irresistible by every sound mind that he was an impostor" -- Thomas Jefferson, Works, Vol. iv, p. 325
"The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God, like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and thousands of martyrs" -- Thomas Jefferson
The God of the Old Testament -- the God which Christians worship -- Jefferson pronounces "a being of terrific character -- cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust" (Works Vol. iv., p. 325).
The Religious Affiliation of Third U.S. President Thomas Jefferson
President Thomas Jefferson was a Protestant. Jefferson was raised as an Episcopalian (Anglican). He was also influenced by English Deists and has often been identified by historians as a Deist. He held many beliefs in common with Unitarians of the time period, and sometimes wrote that he thought the whole country would become Unitarian. He wrote that the teachings of Jesus contain the "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." Wrote: "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know." Source: "Jefferson's Religious Beliefs", by Rebecca Bowman, Monticello Research Department, August 1997 [URL: http://www.monticello.org/resources/interests/religion.html].
http://goo.gl/MIp4A
1787 Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson:
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth... Our sister states of Pennsylvania and New York, however, have long subsisted without any establishment at all. The experiment was new and doubtful when they made it. It has answered beyond conception. They flourish infinitely. Religion is well supported; of various kinds, indeed, but all good enough; all sufficient to preserve peace and order: or if a sect arises, whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play, and reasons and laughs it out of doors, without suffering the state to be troubled with it. They do not hang more malefactors than we do. They are not more disturbed with religious dissensions. On the contrary, their harmony is unparalleled, and can be ascribed to nothing but their unbounded tolerance, because there is no other circumstance in which they differ from every nation on earth. They have made the happy discovery, that the way to silence religious disputes, is to take no notice of them. Let us too give this experiment fair play, and get rid, while we may, of those tyrannical laws."
Richard Hildreth, the historian, in speaking of Jefferson's religious opinions, says:
"Jefferson's relations to the religious opinions of his country were somewhat peculiar. He believed, like Paine, in a personal God and a future life, but, like him, regarded Christianity, in the supernatural view of it, as a popular fable, an instrument for deluding, misgoverning and plundering mankind; and these opinions he entertained, as he did most others, with little regard to any qualifying considerations, and with an energy approaching to fanaticism. But he was no more inclined than were the New England Rationalists to become a martyr to the propagation of unpopular ideas. That he left to Paine and others of less discretion or more courage than himself." (History of the United States, vol. 5, p. 458 .
Src: http://goo.gl/KL1j0
Src: http://goo.gl/EHA8P
Src: http://goo.gl/0Jadi
Src: http://goo.gl/l4pMP
Src: http://goo.gl/Qt0QQ
Src: http://goo.gl/Q9bIy
Src: http://goo.gl/paWcj
!!! (Chk Chk Chk) - Heart Of Hearts
!!!'s Heart Of Hearts. It's the first single taken from the upcoming album Myth Takes out 5th March 2007. myspace.com/loudchkchkchk
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
First Black Elected to Head Harvard's Law Review - published: Feb. 6, 1990
First Black Elected to Head Harvard's Law Review
(published: Feb. 6, 1990)
"..The new president of the Review is Barack Obama, a 28-year-old graduate of Columbia University who spent four years heading a community development program for poor blacks on Chicago's South Side before enrolling in law school. His late father, Barack Obama, was a finance minister in Kenya and his mother, Ann Dunham, is an American anthropologist now doing fieldwork in Indonesia. Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii...." http://goo.gl/4YTCx
A Law Review Breakthrough
(Published: Feb. 15, 1990)
"...Editor's note: In 1990, Globe reporter Linda Matchan and photographer Lane Turner interviewed 28-year-old Barack Obama, a Chicago community organizer who had just become the first African-American head of the Harvard Law Review. The following is an early glimpse of a rising star.
Barack Obama became the first black president of the influential Harvard Law Review last week, after a marathon 17-hour selection process that pitted him against 18 other candidates. But he says he felt the full significance of the honor only after a rival candidate, also black, embraced him....."
(Lane Turner / Globe File Photo)
Obama Named New Law Review President
Student Becomes First Black Chief Of the Publication
(Published: Feb. 6, 1990
"..Receiving support and praise from students and professors, Barack H. Obama was named the 104th president of the Harvard Law Review, becoming the legal journal's first Black leader..." http://goo.gl/DEKOR
====
Timeline: 1960-2011
http://goo.gl/tmxsE
====
Requirements fot the J.D. Degree - Harvard Law School
http://goo.gl/XrXUo
Graduate Handbook
http://goo.gl/mlTpO
Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts - Columbia University
http://goo.gl/yW7wh
====
An oldie:
"..Claim: Barack Obama's thesis for Columbia University, entitled "Aristocracy Reborn," noted that America's founding fathers "did not allow for economic freedom."...."
FALSE: http://goo.gl/kpoOw
====
See also:
Barack Obama ’83 - Is He the New Face of The Democratic Party?
By Shira Boss-Bicak ’93
http://goo.gl/RVG5l
Alumni Corner: Barack Obama ’83, My Columbia College Roommate
By Phil Boerner ’84
http://goo.gl/HrbQe
Limbaugh falls for Obama thesis hoax - but is in no Rush to apologize
http://goo.gl/XEp4k
....
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media
" Media Inquiries
The University of Chicago Law School handles media requests through the University of Chicago News Office. The Law School is happy to work with the media to provide access to our faculty members, who are experts on myriad subjects, or to provide comment on news stories where appropriate. For all media inquiries, please contact Sarah Galer at sgaler@uchicago.edu or 773 702 8365.
Statement Regarding Barack Obama
The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer."
From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.
The University of Chicago Law School | 1111 East 60th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637 | 773.702.9494 "
What is Occam's Razor?
What is Occam's Razor?
"Occam's razor is often cited in stronger forms than Occam intended, as in the following statements. . .
"If you have two theories that both explain the observed facts, then you should use the simplest until more evidence comes along"
"The simplest explanation for some phenomenon is more likely to be accurate than more complicated explanations."
"If you have two equally likely solutions to a problem, choose the simplest."
"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."
. . .or in the only form that takes its own advice. . .
"Keep things simple!" ".......http://goo.gl/jmJr
Monday, March 28, 2011
Humor: Todays Townhall newsletter - Rand Paul: Sign the petition Obama fears
Todays humor.......errrr chain letter warning / fund raiser.
====
Rand Paul: Sign the petition Obama fears
Dear Concerned American,
They snickered when I said I came to the U.S. Senate to change Congress.
But their laughter stopped when I sponsored the National Right to Work Act to free U.S. workers from forced unionization and break Big Labor's multi-billion dollar political machine forever.
President Barack Obama and Big Labor allies in the Senate are now feverishly scheming to bury the National Right to Work Act without a vote.
So I have a question for you.
Will you be the sledgehammer?
Your signature on the petition to your Congressman and Senators is what is needed to bust through the opposition and force a vote on the National Right to Work Act.
This is an opportunity you and I cannot afford to miss.
As you know, the right to decide freely whether or not to join a union was taken away from American workers by Congress almost 75 years ago.
A result of back-room deals between union bosses and their tax-and-spend Congressional puppets, compulsory unionism provisions in federal law currently empower union officials to:
>>>Force nearly 11 million Americans to pay tribute to a union boss to get or keep a job ...
>>>Brazenly loot union treasuries to fund the election of their hand-picked political puppet candidates like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid ...
>>>Terrorize workers and communities with violent strikes -- where they get away with beatings, arson -- even murder.
The National Right to Work Act strikes at the foundations of the union bosses' power.
And here's the thing -- the National Right to Work Act is wildly popular with American voters.
In fact, for years polls have shown nearly 80% of Americans think it should be against the law to force workers to pay money to union bosses just to get or keep a job.
All you and I have to do is force an up-or-down roll call vote on the National Right to Work Act ... And the American people will do the rest.
Many Democrats and more than a few Republicans elected with Big Labor's over $1 billion in forced-dues political cash cower in fear of casting a vote against the National Right to Work Act.
What will they do when forced to vote?
It's a win-win situation -- either they pass the National Right to Work Act and free American workers or they pay in 2012.
It will be a marathon battle.
But I will not flinch in the face of opposition and insider attacks.
I believe, with your help, this is a fight we will win.
And I know it's a fight worth fighting
You see, the union bosses fear a vote on the National Right to Work Act more than just about anything else.
They know it's a losing proposition for them whether the bill passes or not.
The fact is for decades union officials have schemed to seize billions of dollars from their "members" and then used it to elect their candidates to protect these privileges.
This is how Washington -- from Jimmy Carter to Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton to Nancy Pelosi to Barack Obama -- got to be what it is today.
The National Right to Work Act will turn this entrenched, corrupt Washington order on its head.
Every year Big Labor siphons over $8 BILLION from workers' paychecks; mostly from workers who, if they refused to pay, would be fired from their jobs.
Union bosses take this eye-popping heap of dough to feed a lifestyle of limousines, penthouses and raw political power.
And, my friend, Big Labor's political corruption costs all of us:
*Hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts and bloated government spending suck the life out of our economy, rewarding failed businesses like GM and letting union-boss featherbedding and rigged contracts rocket the cost of schools, hospitals and roads through the roof.
*Millions more good-paying jobs destroyed or driven overseas as union czars cripple America's bedrock industries with wasteful work rules, hate-the-boss propaganda and violent strikes.
*You and all Americans robbed of your wealth as the economy stays in recession and the price of cars, gasoline and groceries climbs upwards.
*Small businesses strangled with red tape and bureaucracy designed by greedy union flunkies to kill companies too small for so-called union “organizing.”
That's why it's crucial you sign the petitions today and, if possible, make a generous contribution to the National Right to Work Committee.
It's clear that if the Committee is to rally the 80% of Americans who support this bill they will need your financial support.
The National Right to Work Committee isn't some Johnny-come-lately organization. They've been on the front lines opposing Big Labor for over fifty years.
The National Right to Work Committee is spearheading the effort to rally the American people, just as I am leading the fight here in the Senate.
Without your support for the National Right to Work Committee, they have little chance against Big Labor's money and power in Congress.
That's why I ask you to submit your signed petition, along with the most generous contribution you can afford to the National Right to Work Committee.
In order to pass the National Right to Work Act, the National Right to Work Committee has drawn up an aggressive plan of action:
***Mobilize up to 14 million Americans to stand up for freedom by signing petitions like the one I link to in this email. Only when politicians feel the heat of the people, will they see the light of truth. That's what I meant when I asked you to be my sledgehammer.
***Place full-page newspaper ads and launch intense internet campaigns coast to coast, reminding the American people what Big Labor's power costs all of us in out-of-control government spending, sky-high taxes, a seemingly endless recession, lost jobs and rising prices.
***Inform favorable columnists, talk show hosts and editorial writers nationwide to help mobilize public opinion.
***Run TV and radio ads targeting, if funding permits, wavering Congressmen and Senators in the days leading up to key committee and floor votes.
Without your financial support, this program will not be possible.
And without this program Big Labor will stop the National Right to Work Act in Congress.
It's that simple.
Every dollar the National Right to Work Committee receives comes from Americans like you -- working folks, shopkeepers, business owners, retirees, farmers, engineers, delivery drivers, homemakers, grandmothers and grandfathers. Not one penny of their funding comes from government.
Some friends have already given as much as $1000 or $500 to help this campaign get going. A special few have given even more.
Many others have sacrificially given $100, $50 or even just $25 -- whatever they could afford.
I do not know what you can afford to give today, but this is too important not to ask ... and I hope too important for you not to contribute.
After you sign your petition, will you please chip in with a generous contribution of $25, $50, $100 or even $500 or more to the National Right to Work Committee?
I know the Committee can never hope to match Big Labor dollar-for-dollar. But they don't need to.
The American people overwhelmingly stand with you and me.
But the National Right to Work Committee must have the finances to reach out to the people and mobilize them in support of the National Right to Work Act. That's what it will take to beat Big Labor.
Your contribution of $50, $100 or $500 (or at least $25 or $35) along with your signed petition are key to this campaign.
Please do not delay signing the petition or think someone else will carry the load. I count on your support.
Sincerely,
[img of signature]
Rand Paul, M.D.
U.S. Senator
PS.Tea Party revolts and the election of real outsiders ready to shake up Congress means you and I have an historic opportunity to break the cycle of tax-and-spend, political corruption and out of control budgets caused by Big Labor's compulsory union power.
But you must strike now to make Congressmen and Senators choose between standing with the 80% of Americans who oppose forced unionism and Big Labor's multi-billion dollar political machine. It will be an epic, historic battle and your support is critical.
Please sign the petition to your Congressman and Senators and make your most generous contribution of $500 or $100 -- or at least $50 or $25 -- whatever you can afford today.
http://goo.gl/6AydL
SUBSCRIPTION INFO
This email is never sent unsolicited. It is only sent to people on the Townhall.com network OR a friend might have forwarded it to you. We respect and value your time and privacy.
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from this Townhall Spotlight by clicking here.
OR Send postal mail to:
Townhall Spotlight Unsubscribe
1901 N. Moore St - Suite 701, Arlington, VA 22209
WERE YOU FORWARDED THIS EDITION OF THE TOWNHALL SPOTLIGHT?
You can get your own free subscription by clicking here.
http://goo.gl/xZEz6
* Copyright Townhall and its Content Providers. All rights reserved.
====
Rand Paul: Sign the petition Obama fears
Dear Concerned American,
They snickered when I said I came to the U.S. Senate to change Congress.
But their laughter stopped when I sponsored the National Right to Work Act to free U.S. workers from forced unionization and break Big Labor's multi-billion dollar political machine forever.
President Barack Obama and Big Labor allies in the Senate are now feverishly scheming to bury the National Right to Work Act without a vote.
So I have a question for you.
Will you be the sledgehammer?
Your signature on the petition to your Congressman and Senators is what is needed to bust through the opposition and force a vote on the National Right to Work Act.
This is an opportunity you and I cannot afford to miss.
As you know, the right to decide freely whether or not to join a union was taken away from American workers by Congress almost 75 years ago.
A result of back-room deals between union bosses and their tax-and-spend Congressional puppets, compulsory unionism provisions in federal law currently empower union officials to:
>>>Force nearly 11 million Americans to pay tribute to a union boss to get or keep a job ...
>>>Brazenly loot union treasuries to fund the election of their hand-picked political puppet candidates like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid ...
>>>Terrorize workers and communities with violent strikes -- where they get away with beatings, arson -- even murder.
The National Right to Work Act strikes at the foundations of the union bosses' power.
And here's the thing -- the National Right to Work Act is wildly popular with American voters.
In fact, for years polls have shown nearly 80% of Americans think it should be against the law to force workers to pay money to union bosses just to get or keep a job.
All you and I have to do is force an up-or-down roll call vote on the National Right to Work Act ... And the American people will do the rest.
Many Democrats and more than a few Republicans elected with Big Labor's over $1 billion in forced-dues political cash cower in fear of casting a vote against the National Right to Work Act.
What will they do when forced to vote?
It's a win-win situation -- either they pass the National Right to Work Act and free American workers or they pay in 2012.
It will be a marathon battle.
But I will not flinch in the face of opposition and insider attacks.
I believe, with your help, this is a fight we will win.
And I know it's a fight worth fighting
You see, the union bosses fear a vote on the National Right to Work Act more than just about anything else.
They know it's a losing proposition for them whether the bill passes or not.
The fact is for decades union officials have schemed to seize billions of dollars from their "members" and then used it to elect their candidates to protect these privileges.
This is how Washington -- from Jimmy Carter to Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton to Nancy Pelosi to Barack Obama -- got to be what it is today.
The National Right to Work Act will turn this entrenched, corrupt Washington order on its head.
Every year Big Labor siphons over $8 BILLION from workers' paychecks; mostly from workers who, if they refused to pay, would be fired from their jobs.
Union bosses take this eye-popping heap of dough to feed a lifestyle of limousines, penthouses and raw political power.
And, my friend, Big Labor's political corruption costs all of us:
*Hundreds of billions of dollars in bailouts and bloated government spending suck the life out of our economy, rewarding failed businesses like GM and letting union-boss featherbedding and rigged contracts rocket the cost of schools, hospitals and roads through the roof.
*Millions more good-paying jobs destroyed or driven overseas as union czars cripple America's bedrock industries with wasteful work rules, hate-the-boss propaganda and violent strikes.
*You and all Americans robbed of your wealth as the economy stays in recession and the price of cars, gasoline and groceries climbs upwards.
*Small businesses strangled with red tape and bureaucracy designed by greedy union flunkies to kill companies too small for so-called union “organizing.”
That's why it's crucial you sign the petitions today and, if possible, make a generous contribution to the National Right to Work Committee.
It's clear that if the Committee is to rally the 80% of Americans who support this bill they will need your financial support.
The National Right to Work Committee isn't some Johnny-come-lately organization. They've been on the front lines opposing Big Labor for over fifty years.
The National Right to Work Committee is spearheading the effort to rally the American people, just as I am leading the fight here in the Senate.
Without your support for the National Right to Work Committee, they have little chance against Big Labor's money and power in Congress.
That's why I ask you to submit your signed petition, along with the most generous contribution you can afford to the National Right to Work Committee.
In order to pass the National Right to Work Act, the National Right to Work Committee has drawn up an aggressive plan of action:
***Mobilize up to 14 million Americans to stand up for freedom by signing petitions like the one I link to in this email. Only when politicians feel the heat of the people, will they see the light of truth. That's what I meant when I asked you to be my sledgehammer.
***Place full-page newspaper ads and launch intense internet campaigns coast to coast, reminding the American people what Big Labor's power costs all of us in out-of-control government spending, sky-high taxes, a seemingly endless recession, lost jobs and rising prices.
***Inform favorable columnists, talk show hosts and editorial writers nationwide to help mobilize public opinion.
***Run TV and radio ads targeting, if funding permits, wavering Congressmen and Senators in the days leading up to key committee and floor votes.
Without your financial support, this program will not be possible.
And without this program Big Labor will stop the National Right to Work Act in Congress.
It's that simple.
Every dollar the National Right to Work Committee receives comes from Americans like you -- working folks, shopkeepers, business owners, retirees, farmers, engineers, delivery drivers, homemakers, grandmothers and grandfathers. Not one penny of their funding comes from government.
Some friends have already given as much as $1000 or $500 to help this campaign get going. A special few have given even more.
Many others have sacrificially given $100, $50 or even just $25 -- whatever they could afford.
I do not know what you can afford to give today, but this is too important not to ask ... and I hope too important for you not to contribute.
After you sign your petition, will you please chip in with a generous contribution of $25, $50, $100 or even $500 or more to the National Right to Work Committee?
I know the Committee can never hope to match Big Labor dollar-for-dollar. But they don't need to.
The American people overwhelmingly stand with you and me.
But the National Right to Work Committee must have the finances to reach out to the people and mobilize them in support of the National Right to Work Act. That's what it will take to beat Big Labor.
Your contribution of $50, $100 or $500 (or at least $25 or $35) along with your signed petition are key to this campaign.
Please do not delay signing the petition or think someone else will carry the load. I count on your support.
Sincerely,
[img of signature]
Rand Paul, M.D.
U.S. Senator
PS.Tea Party revolts and the election of real outsiders ready to shake up Congress means you and I have an historic opportunity to break the cycle of tax-and-spend, political corruption and out of control budgets caused by Big Labor's compulsory union power.
But you must strike now to make Congressmen and Senators choose between standing with the 80% of Americans who oppose forced unionism and Big Labor's multi-billion dollar political machine. It will be an epic, historic battle and your support is critical.
Please sign the petition to your Congressman and Senators and make your most generous contribution of $500 or $100 -- or at least $50 or $25 -- whatever you can afford today.
http://goo.gl/6AydL
SUBSCRIPTION INFO
This email is never sent unsolicited. It is only sent to people on the Townhall.com network OR a friend might have forwarded it to you. We respect and value your time and privacy.
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from this Townhall Spotlight by clicking here.
OR Send postal mail to:
Townhall Spotlight Unsubscribe
1901 N. Moore St - Suite 701, Arlington, VA 22209
WERE YOU FORWARDED THIS EDITION OF THE TOWNHALL SPOTLIGHT?
You can get your own free subscription by clicking here.
http://goo.gl/xZEz6
* Copyright Townhall and its Content Providers. All rights reserved.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Microbial Evolution and Systematics
Microbial Evolution and Systematics
Physical Evolution of Earth
Big Bang led to generation of our solar system and primitive Earth
According to current theory, before the big bang, all matter in the universe was concentrated as a point-source of infinite mass ... a gravitational singularity
13.7 (+/- 0.17) billion years ago (Ba), this infinitely massive point-source exploded, very rapidly expanding the matter to ever-enlarging volume, spewing intense radiation and energy (recent evidence indicates that this process may be a recurrent one, with cycles of expansion followed by contraction followed by big bangs)......http://goo.gl/HqHOn
Word of the Day: equivocate
Word of the Day
To be deliberately ambiguous or unclear in order to mislead or to
To be deliberately ambiguous or unclear in order to mislead or to
avoid committing oneself to anything definite
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Jimmy Wong Saves the Internet
Gizmodo, the Gadget Guide:
"It seems like a great time to be a bully. When I was a kid, even the most productive bullies could only manage a handful of victims at a time. What used to take a lot of effort can now be handled with a couple thumbs and some wifi. A hateful rumor can spread a lot faster on Facebook than it could on the school bathroom wall."
"It seems like a great time to be a bully. When I was a kid, even the most productive bullies could only manage a handful of victims at a time. What used to take a lot of effort can now be handled with a couple thumbs and some wifi. A hateful rumor can spread a lot faster on Facebook than it could on the school bathroom wall."
Friday, March 25, 2011
Hateful and incendiary politics - social media and news
Note: research: not intended to offend anyone "by making available".
Hateful and Incendiary Politics - social media and news
A response to: http://goo.gl/2wn2e
General thread point of view: "civility" from the Left again."
Hate speech, derogatory comments, etc - a two way street
Google search results, due to profanity use caution and certain keywords have been altered with ( * ) - you will need to fill in the blank. Results do not necessarily contain damaging or offensive content.
(copy and paste into search box - turn safe search off for better results)
Olddogg and townhall related ( you are welcome for any boost in traffic )
"**ck you" site:olddogg.com
**ck you site:olddogg.com
"**ck you" site:townhall.com
"**gger" site:olddogg.com
"**gger" site:townhall.com
"libtards" site:olddogg.com
"libtards" site:townhall.com
"libtard" site:olddogg.com
"god" site:olddogg.com
"religion" site:olddogg.com
"religious right" site:townhall.com
"obama" site:olddogg.com
"*ags" site:townhall.com
Fox Related (search keywords not censored, click at own discretion - newshounds.us)
hate speech
http://goo.gl/X0i72
**gger
http://goo.gl/Irtsr
*ags
http://goo.gl/sY8R1
religious right
http://goo.gl/jahbV
General keyword search results (not censored, click at own discretion)
"**gger president"
http://goo.gl/VEk5W
**gger president
http://goo.gl/42awQ
"libtards **ck you"
http://goo.gl/71ft4
"god hates *ags"
http://goo.gl/NURUj
"god hates liberals"
http://goo.gl/4rXVL
"religious right"
http://goo.gl/YqKjm
"right wing hate"
http://goo.gl/eJQdw
"beck hate speech"
http://goo.gl/hiu3x
"fox news hate speech"
http://goo.gl/WkEib
worst conservative hate groups
http://goo.gl/L6Z1O
Websites with Oppressive or Right-wing Agendas That Undermine Democracy & Diversity
http://goo.gl/pZKur
Hateful and Incendiary Politics - social media and news
A response to: http://goo.gl/2wn2e
General thread point of view: "civility" from the Left again."
Hate speech, derogatory comments, etc - a two way street
Google search results, due to profanity use caution and certain keywords have been altered with ( * ) - you will need to fill in the blank. Results do not necessarily contain damaging or offensive content.
(copy and paste into search box - turn safe search off for better results)
Olddogg and townhall related ( you are welcome for any boost in traffic )
"**ck you" site:olddogg.com
**ck you site:olddogg.com
"**ck you" site:townhall.com
"**gger" site:olddogg.com
"**gger" site:townhall.com
"libtards" site:olddogg.com
"libtards" site:townhall.com
"libtard" site:olddogg.com
"god" site:olddogg.com
"religion" site:olddogg.com
"religious right" site:townhall.com
"obama" site:olddogg.com
"*ags" site:townhall.com
Fox Related (search keywords not censored, click at own discretion - newshounds.us)
hate speech
http://goo.gl/X0i72
**gger
http://goo.gl/Irtsr
*ags
http://goo.gl/sY8R1
religious right
http://goo.gl/jahbV
General keyword search results (not censored, click at own discretion)
"**gger president"
http://goo.gl/VEk5W
**gger president
http://goo.gl/42awQ
"libtards **ck you"
http://goo.gl/71ft4
"god hates *ags"
http://goo.gl/NURUj
"god hates liberals"
http://goo.gl/4rXVL
"religious right"
http://goo.gl/YqKjm
"right wing hate"
http://goo.gl/eJQdw
"beck hate speech"
http://goo.gl/hiu3x
"fox news hate speech"
http://goo.gl/WkEib
worst conservative hate groups
http://goo.gl/L6Z1O
Websites with Oppressive or Right-wing Agendas That Undermine Democracy & Diversity
http://goo.gl/pZKur
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Michele Bachmann Religion: Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)
Michele Bachmann Religion:
Doctrinal statements | Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)
Evangelicals take the Bible seriously and believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
The term “evangelical” comes from the Greek word euangelion, meaning “the good news” or the “gospel.” Thus, the evangelical faith focuses on the “good news” of salvation brought to sinners by Jesus Christ.
We are a vibrant and diverse group, including believers found in many churches, denominations and nations. Our community brings together Reformed, Holiness, Anabaptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic and other traditions. Our core theological convictions provide unity in the midst of our diversity. The NAE Statement of Faith offers a standard for these evangelical convictions.
Historian David Bebbington also provides a helpful summary of evangelical distinctives, identifying four primary characteristics of evangelicalism:
Education:
LLM, Tax Law, College of William and Mary
( citation needed ? , no such degree offered )
JD, Oral Roberts University
BA, Winona State University
Professional Experience:
Owner, Mental Health Care Practice, present
Federal Tax Litigation Attorney
Political Experience:
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2006-present
Assistant Minority Leader, Minnesota State Senate, 2006
Senator, Minnesota State Senate, 2000-2006
Organizations:
Member, Advisory Board, Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute
Foster Parent
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Tea Party Caucus
Committees:
Financial Services, Member
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Member
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Financial Services), Member
Doctrinal statements | Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)
“From my personal reading I believe Islam (reflecting statements in the Quran and historical developments of a fairly consistent ideology) has never been a tolerant religion and actively seeks peace only if it does so for its own purposes--eventually to dominate the world religiously and culturally.” -- Michele Bachmann
“Although Muhammad was an antichrist and Islam is anti-Christian, we do not identify Muhammad with the Antichrist because he does not fit the description in 2 Thessalonains 2:1-2.” -- Michele Bachmann
“. . . we accept that the Pope is the Antichrist . . . because among all the antichristian manifestations in the history of the world and the Church that lie behind us in the past there is none that fits the description given in 2 Thess. 2 better than the Papacy.” -- Michele Bachmann
What is an Evangelical?
The term “evangelical” comes from the Greek word euangelion, meaning “the good news” or the “gospel.” Thus, the evangelical faith focuses on the “good news” of salvation brought to sinners by Jesus Christ.
We are a vibrant and diverse group, including believers found in many churches, denominations and nations. Our community brings together Reformed, Holiness, Anabaptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic and other traditions. Our core theological convictions provide unity in the midst of our diversity. The NAE Statement of Faith offers a standard for these evangelical convictions.
Historian David Bebbington also provides a helpful summary of evangelical distinctives, identifying four primary characteristics of evangelicalism:
- Conversionism: the belief that lives need to be transformed through a “born-again” experience and a life long process of following Jesus.
- Activism: the expression and demonstration of the gospel in missionary and social reform efforts
- Biblicism: a high regard for and obedience to the Bible as the ultimate authority
- Crucicentrism: a stress on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as making possible the redemption of humanity
====
====
" STATEMENT ON THE ANTICHRIST
Introduction to the Statement
As Martin Luther grew in his appreciation of the gospel, he also grew in his recognition that the Papacy is the Antichrist. A 1954 WELS pamphlet entitled Antichrist put it this way: "It was because Luther cherished the Gospel so dearly that his faith instinctively recoiled and protested in unmistakable terms when the Pope put himself in the place of Christ and declared His work insufficient and in vain. That is the use to which Luther's faith put the prophecy of Scripture. For him the tenet that the Pope is the Antichrist was an article of faith."
Luther left no doubt where he stood concerning the Papacy when he wrote, "This teaching [of the supremacy of the pope] shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ, because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. This is, properly speaking, to exalt himself above all that is called God. . . . The Pope, however, prohibits this faith, saying that to be saved a person must obey him" (Smalcald Articles, II, IV, 10-12).
In the centuries after Luther's death, Lutherans accepted this confessional statement without reservation or qualification. In the 1860s, however, doubts about this confessional statement were raised within Lutheranism. They arose from the Iowa Synod, which refused to grant doctrinal status to the teaching that the Papacy is the Antichrist. They listed this teaching under the category of "open questions." The Missouri Synod took the lead, at that time, in defending the view of the Lutheran Confessions that the prophecies of Antichrist have been fulfilled in the Papacy...." -- http://goo.gl/usts9
"....A significant percentage of the members of our church are former Catholics, so we certainly have no bad feelings toward Catholic people. But we do not agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church that are not based on the Bible...." -- http://goo.gl/wiHud
====
====
Michele Bachmann (MN)
Education:
LLM, Tax Law, College of William and Mary
( citation needed ? , no such degree offered )
JD, Oral Roberts University
BA, Winona State University
Professional Experience:
Owner, Mental Health Care Practice, present
Federal Tax Litigation Attorney
Political Experience:
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2006-present
Assistant Minority Leader, Minnesota State Senate, 2006
Senator, Minnesota State Senate, 2000-2006
Organizations:
Member, Advisory Board, Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute
Foster Parent
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Tea Party Caucus
Committees:
Financial Services, Member
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Member
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Financial Services), Member
....
Bachmann: "Not All Cultures Are Equal"
Alt. Video Src.: http://goo.gl/8Nu9x
....
Michele Bachmann Smackdown
Alt. Video Src.: http://goo.gl/YdHgl
....
See also: 07.08.2011 http://goo.gl/c3Q5t
Excellent & simplistic answers to: Can you explain global warming to me ?
Excellent and simplistic answers to: Can you explain global warming to me ?
Src: Yq/a
====
====
Annalies
Can you explain global warming to me ?
I'm very confused about global warming. People always tell me how urgently we need to respond to global warming and they make it seem like temperatures have been rising exponentially. So I decided to research global warming and decide for myself if this is the case ( I have just been taking people's word for it before this). I found out that the earth has warmed up 1.3 degrees over the past 100 years. THAT is what people are so concerned about? The temperature must have risen a lot more than that in order for the ice age to end! Also, I can't seem to find anything about temperatures before the 20th century so how do we know that we're in trouble? (Or maybe I just couldn't find the data). Actually, we had a colder than usual winter where I live this year and some of my friends suggest that that's because of global warming. But then why is it called global WARMING? Changing temperatures just seem normal to me. And if it only rises about 1 degree each century then shouldn't everyone just calm down a bit and be confident that American ingenuity will solve the problem if there is one? So as you can see, the global warming issue confuses me. I could be wrong as I clearly do not know a lot about it but generally it just does not seem to make sense. Thanks in advance for answering and giving your opinion.
====
====
Trevor
● Can you explain global warming to me?
Dawei, Antarcticice and MTRstudent have each provided you with excellent answers (they each have relevant qualifications so know a lot about climate change). I’ll add my contribution by taking each of your points in turn…
● I'm very confused about global warming.
There are a lot of conflicting arguments out there and this is causing a lot of confusion for many people. Effectively you have the scientists on one side claiming that global warming is real and on the other side you have groups funded by the oil and power industries claiming it’s not real.
● People always tell me how urgently we need to respond to global warming
The effects of global warming are progressive. There will be no sudden overnight changes and no scenarios as depicted in the movies. The longer we leave it the harder and more expensive it becomes to deal with. The damage that global warming causes increases each year, so too does the number of people, plants and animals that are dying or being adversely affected.
● and they make it seem like temperatures have been rising exponentially.
Temperatures are rising faster now than has ever before been known, the rise isn’t exponential but it’s very significant (more later).
● So I decided to research global warming and decide for myself if this is the case ( I have just been taking people's word for it before this).
Always a good idea to conduct your own research. But a word of warming, do check the validity of your sources. Much of what you read in the media is written by journalists who have little or no understanding of the science involved, make sure they cite their sources and that these sources are reliable. Ignore journals, blogs, forums etc as these can be written by anyone at all, they are often very biased and in the worst cases they invent whatever ‘evidence’ is needed to validate their argument.
● I found out that the earth has warmed up 1.3 degrees over the past 100 years.
In 1910 the average global temperature was between 13.588°C (56.458°F) and 13.702°C (56.664°F). Today it is between 14.475°C (58.055°F) and 14.542°C (58.176°F). The difference being between 0.773°C (1.391°F) and 0.954°C (1.717°F). The actual figures vary depending on the source and method used to calculate the temperature.
● THAT is what people are so concerned about?
It doesn’t seem much of a rise does it. However, it needs to be put into context. In terms of Earth’s natural variability and adaptability this far exceeds normal parameters. Temperatures are rising and the climate is changing much faster than our planet and many of the species upon it can adapt to.
● The temperature must have risen a lot more than that in order for the ice age to end!
Yes it did. But again, it’s a matter of context. The last ice-age began to end some 19,000 years ago at which time the average global temperature was 8°C (14°F) colder than it is today. For 12,000 years the ice melted as the world warmed up. By the end of the ice-age temperatures had increased by 7°C (13°F).
This 7°C (13°F) rise took place over 12,000 years. That’s the equivalent of 1°C (1.8°F) every 1700 years. In today’s world we’re seeing that same level of increase every 54 years, more than 30 times as fast as during the ending of the ice age.
● Also, I can't seem to find anything about temperatures before the 20th century so how do we know that we're in trouble? (Or maybe I just couldn't find the data).
It looks like the data eluded you. The earliest instrumental (thermometer) record dates from 1659, this is a record known as HadCET, the most comprehensive record runs from 1850 and this is known as HadCRUT3. Both these, any dozens of others, can be viewed and downloaded from the UK’s Met Office http://hadobs.metoffice.com/index.html
When we go back further in time we need to use a different technique, it becomes necessary to reconstruct temperature data. There are many ways of doing this but one of the most accurate and extensive methods is through oxygen isotope analysis.
In the polar regions and mountainous regions the snow never melts, it simply accumulates layer upon layer and compresses into ice. Trapped within the ice are bubbles of air from the time the snow fell. We can take cores from the ice, melt the ice in hermetically sealed (airtight) chambers and analyse the air. In particular we’re looking at the different types of oxygen and deuterium. Oxygen for example, comes in different forms (isotopes) and the relationship between these forms is extremely sensitive to temperature. The ratio of oxygen isotope 16 to isotope 18 enables us to determine just what the temperature was right back for almost a million years.
Here’s more about the sampling techniques http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core and graphs showing temps over the last 12,000 years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png the last 450,000 years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png and the last 5.5 million years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Five_Myr_Climate_Change.png
● Actually, we had a colder than usual winter where I live this year and some of my friends suggest that that's because of global warming. But then why is it called global WARMING?
The cold weather that affected parts of the US and Europe this last winter was caused by a cyclical weather event. At intervals of approx 15 years, changes in atmospheric and oceanic conditions in the North Atlantic region lead to an area of high pressure establishing itself over the Arctic, this feeds cold air into parts of the surrounding northern hemisphere.
When you look back at previously harsh winters you’ll notice a regular pattern – 1917, 1931, 1946, 1963, 1979, 1995 and now 2009. It’s likely we’ll see the next similar event in about 2024. Of the 15 instances on record, the most recent one was actually the mildest.
● Changing temperatures just seem normal to me.
Throughout the history of Earth, the temperatures have always changed. There have been instances when it’s been so warm that the North and South Poles have had tropical climates, similarly there have been times when it’s been cold enough to freeze the whole planet. Changes of this magnitude happen extremely slowly, over many millions of years.
Natural changes are determined by numerous cycles, mostly relating to the behaviour of the Sun and / or the way that Earth moves in space. These changes happen very slowly, not even close to the current rate of change.
● And if it only rises about 1 degree each century then shouldn't everyone just calm down a bit and be confident that American ingenuity will solve the problem if there is one?
It’s a matter of keeping it in context. Climate change will not be as extreme as some people claim but we are already seeing noticeable effects including a doubling in the number of category 5 hurricanes, millions of square kilometres of ice and permafrost having melted, millions forced from their homes due to encroaching deserts and rising sea levels, the spread of tropical diseases etc.
The Americans are behind much of the world when it comes to using ingenuity to solve the problem. There are about 20 different scientific and technological solutions that have been proposed, most of them have come from Europe.
● So as you can see, the global warming issue confuses me. I could be wrong as I clearly do not know a lot about it but generally it just does not seem to make sense.
The climate is phenomenally complicated, it’s necessary to have quite a bit of background information before it starts to make sense and the pieces fit together. It is not something that can be learned from the media, friends, internet blogs etc. There are about a dozen people here on Answers that sufficiently understand the mechanisms involved, most of these people have degrees and doctorates in relevant subjects.
● Thanks in advance for answering and giving your opinion.
You’re welcome. I know there’s a lot of points that I mentioned, please feel free to ask if you want clarification or more details about any of these issues.
====
====
Dawei
<>
The 1.3 F rise that we have seen so far is not what people are concerned about. It (obviously) has not caused too much destruction so far. It is the potential of a future, significant warming that people are concerned about, of something like 3 or 4 C by the end of the century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Global_Warming_Predictions.png
<>
The difference between an ice age climate and that of an interglacial (which is what we are in today) is only about 5 or 6 C.
http://envstudies.brown.edu/oldsite/Thesis/2001/rowland/Images/TempCO2.jpg
It doesn't sound like a huge difference, but it is enough to completely change the climate. An ice age Earth looks completely different from an interglacial one.
As you can see from the above, we do have somewhat reliable ways of figuring out how temperatures have changed even though we don't have direct instrument measurements. This is done through using proxies, such as tree rings or studying the ratio of oxygen isotopes trapped in air bubbles from ice cores. Using several different, independent proxies and comparing their results is a good way to have confidence in their accuracy, as you can see here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/ipcc2007/fig6-10b.png
<>
Your friends are wrong. It always happens that some places feel colder than usual or hotter than usual. The climate is complicated, but all it really takes to have a colder than usual winter is for a cold air mass to roll down to wherever you are from the North. Even though this winter was very cold for some places, globally it was still the warmest Jan-Feb-March ever recorded.
April 2010 was the warmest April ever recorded. Yet many places were still quite chilly compared to what they usually are, such as much of China, Japan, and Korea. This is true every month. http://goo.gl/L2Gck
====
====
Antarcticice
A warning for all: don't waste your bandwidth on Harvs link it has noting to do with the subject from either side and is pure trolling. If trolls have to post this rubbish they could at least use someone who can actually sing. Back to the question
--------------------------------------…
You don't supply a link or mention who said temperatures were going up 'exponentially' so it's hard to make a comment on such unsupported statements.
As far as temperature goes 1.3 deg as a global average rise in just a century is a quite a marked rise given that the average temperature only has to rise about 8 deg for the planet to be ice free. The 1.3 is and average the rate of warming in the Arctic is almost twice this rate, which is why this is happening.
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100504_Figure3.png
Just a few weeks ago deniers were crowing that the Arctic had returned to normal (after a cold Northern Winter) it was explained to them that this was a short term event and would melt quickly as Summer returned, which is exactly what happened and now they have gone very quite on the subject.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
As far as it only rising 1deg a century that is not the likely case if the science is correct and our GH gas emissions are to blame those emissions are going up at an 'exponential rate' (this time the use of the word is correct) if we act and reduce our current emissions by changing technologies for transport and energy we may hold the temperature increase to 2 deg if we don't then we face the likelihood of rises of more like 3-5 deg which would have marked affects on both global weather systems and sea level rise.
We know from historical tidal records that historic sea level rise was (over the last century was ~1.7mm per year and that rate almost doubled in the early 1990's
http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#SeaLevel
Deniers will tell you that sea level has been rising since the end of the last ice age and it is certainly true that levels did rise significantly, as can be seen here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
but this slowed significantly ~7000 years ago and more or less stopped ~2000 years ago. If seas had been rising, using the smaller (1.7mm) figure, for the last 2000 years sea levels would have risen 3.4m, they didn't. Which on the graph above would be a line at near 45degs line instead of the flat line shown.
====
====
MTRstudent
Dawei and antarcticice covered it well!
A few other bits: we can estimate temperature from thousands of years ago by doing things like counting the ratio between different isotopes of oxygen in ice cores AND in sediment cores (bit of rock dug up from the floor of the ocean, made from shells etc all squashed together). In sediment cores they can count the different types of foraminifera, little critters with shells that either curl left or right; one type dominates in cold water, the other in warm water.
Anyway, people tested both and came up with a history; they put them side by side and they matched, so they're probably quite reliable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MilankovitchCyclesOrbitandCores.png
(bottom shows 'benthic forams,' those little critters from sediment cores, vs ice cores using oxygen isotope data). An ice age appears to be about 4-6C cooler than today.
Every doubling of CO2 is believed to cause 2-4.5C of warming, with a best estimate of 3C:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
and if we didn't do anything, we'd probs do TWO doublings, i.e. 6C of _global_ warming: more than the difference between today and Scotland being covered in ice.
The warming is sort of going exponentially: we expect temperature rise to continue accelerating, but it will seem very slow to begin with. We raised temperatures 0.17C from the '90s to the '00s. We expect this to slowly increase, but you'll still probably only see ~0.02C rise temperature a year for a couple of decades yet. The solar cycle causes ~0.1C of cooling or warming in about 5 years, and El Nino can cause 0.4C of change in months. This makes it very hard to pick out if you look at very short trends (less than a decade, or maybe even 2):
http://www.skepticalscience.com/1998-DIY-Statistics.html
on top of that, you have the confusion between weather and climate. It's been chilly in N Europe and the USA over the winter, but Canada, the Pacific, S America, S Atlantic, Australia, India, Middle East, Africa, Indian Ocean, Tibet and SE Asia were all warm.
src: Yq/a - http://goo.gl/zhXka
Src: Yq/a
====
====
Annalies
Can you explain global warming to me ?
I'm very confused about global warming. People always tell me how urgently we need to respond to global warming and they make it seem like temperatures have been rising exponentially. So I decided to research global warming and decide for myself if this is the case ( I have just been taking people's word for it before this). I found out that the earth has warmed up 1.3 degrees over the past 100 years. THAT is what people are so concerned about? The temperature must have risen a lot more than that in order for the ice age to end! Also, I can't seem to find anything about temperatures before the 20th century so how do we know that we're in trouble? (Or maybe I just couldn't find the data). Actually, we had a colder than usual winter where I live this year and some of my friends suggest that that's because of global warming. But then why is it called global WARMING? Changing temperatures just seem normal to me. And if it only rises about 1 degree each century then shouldn't everyone just calm down a bit and be confident that American ingenuity will solve the problem if there is one? So as you can see, the global warming issue confuses me. I could be wrong as I clearly do not know a lot about it but generally it just does not seem to make sense. Thanks in advance for answering and giving your opinion.
====
====
Trevor
● Can you explain global warming to me?
Dawei, Antarcticice and MTRstudent have each provided you with excellent answers (they each have relevant qualifications so know a lot about climate change). I’ll add my contribution by taking each of your points in turn…
● I'm very confused about global warming.
There are a lot of conflicting arguments out there and this is causing a lot of confusion for many people. Effectively you have the scientists on one side claiming that global warming is real and on the other side you have groups funded by the oil and power industries claiming it’s not real.
● People always tell me how urgently we need to respond to global warming
The effects of global warming are progressive. There will be no sudden overnight changes and no scenarios as depicted in the movies. The longer we leave it the harder and more expensive it becomes to deal with. The damage that global warming causes increases each year, so too does the number of people, plants and animals that are dying or being adversely affected.
● and they make it seem like temperatures have been rising exponentially.
Temperatures are rising faster now than has ever before been known, the rise isn’t exponential but it’s very significant (more later).
● So I decided to research global warming and decide for myself if this is the case ( I have just been taking people's word for it before this).
Always a good idea to conduct your own research. But a word of warming, do check the validity of your sources. Much of what you read in the media is written by journalists who have little or no understanding of the science involved, make sure they cite their sources and that these sources are reliable. Ignore journals, blogs, forums etc as these can be written by anyone at all, they are often very biased and in the worst cases they invent whatever ‘evidence’ is needed to validate their argument.
● I found out that the earth has warmed up 1.3 degrees over the past 100 years.
In 1910 the average global temperature was between 13.588°C (56.458°F) and 13.702°C (56.664°F). Today it is between 14.475°C (58.055°F) and 14.542°C (58.176°F). The difference being between 0.773°C (1.391°F) and 0.954°C (1.717°F). The actual figures vary depending on the source and method used to calculate the temperature.
● THAT is what people are so concerned about?
It doesn’t seem much of a rise does it. However, it needs to be put into context. In terms of Earth’s natural variability and adaptability this far exceeds normal parameters. Temperatures are rising and the climate is changing much faster than our planet and many of the species upon it can adapt to.
● The temperature must have risen a lot more than that in order for the ice age to end!
Yes it did. But again, it’s a matter of context. The last ice-age began to end some 19,000 years ago at which time the average global temperature was 8°C (14°F) colder than it is today. For 12,000 years the ice melted as the world warmed up. By the end of the ice-age temperatures had increased by 7°C (13°F).
This 7°C (13°F) rise took place over 12,000 years. That’s the equivalent of 1°C (1.8°F) every 1700 years. In today’s world we’re seeing that same level of increase every 54 years, more than 30 times as fast as during the ending of the ice age.
● Also, I can't seem to find anything about temperatures before the 20th century so how do we know that we're in trouble? (Or maybe I just couldn't find the data).
It looks like the data eluded you. The earliest instrumental (thermometer) record dates from 1659, this is a record known as HadCET, the most comprehensive record runs from 1850 and this is known as HadCRUT3. Both these, any dozens of others, can be viewed and downloaded from the UK’s Met Office http://hadobs.metoffice.com/index.html
When we go back further in time we need to use a different technique, it becomes necessary to reconstruct temperature data. There are many ways of doing this but one of the most accurate and extensive methods is through oxygen isotope analysis.
In the polar regions and mountainous regions the snow never melts, it simply accumulates layer upon layer and compresses into ice. Trapped within the ice are bubbles of air from the time the snow fell. We can take cores from the ice, melt the ice in hermetically sealed (airtight) chambers and analyse the air. In particular we’re looking at the different types of oxygen and deuterium. Oxygen for example, comes in different forms (isotopes) and the relationship between these forms is extremely sensitive to temperature. The ratio of oxygen isotope 16 to isotope 18 enables us to determine just what the temperature was right back for almost a million years.
Here’s more about the sampling techniques http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core and graphs showing temps over the last 12,000 years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png the last 450,000 years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png and the last 5.5 million years http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Five_Myr_Climate_Change.png
● Actually, we had a colder than usual winter where I live this year and some of my friends suggest that that's because of global warming. But then why is it called global WARMING?
The cold weather that affected parts of the US and Europe this last winter was caused by a cyclical weather event. At intervals of approx 15 years, changes in atmospheric and oceanic conditions in the North Atlantic region lead to an area of high pressure establishing itself over the Arctic, this feeds cold air into parts of the surrounding northern hemisphere.
When you look back at previously harsh winters you’ll notice a regular pattern – 1917, 1931, 1946, 1963, 1979, 1995 and now 2009. It’s likely we’ll see the next similar event in about 2024. Of the 15 instances on record, the most recent one was actually the mildest.
● Changing temperatures just seem normal to me.
Throughout the history of Earth, the temperatures have always changed. There have been instances when it’s been so warm that the North and South Poles have had tropical climates, similarly there have been times when it’s been cold enough to freeze the whole planet. Changes of this magnitude happen extremely slowly, over many millions of years.
Natural changes are determined by numerous cycles, mostly relating to the behaviour of the Sun and / or the way that Earth moves in space. These changes happen very slowly, not even close to the current rate of change.
● And if it only rises about 1 degree each century then shouldn't everyone just calm down a bit and be confident that American ingenuity will solve the problem if there is one?
It’s a matter of keeping it in context. Climate change will not be as extreme as some people claim but we are already seeing noticeable effects including a doubling in the number of category 5 hurricanes, millions of square kilometres of ice and permafrost having melted, millions forced from their homes due to encroaching deserts and rising sea levels, the spread of tropical diseases etc.
The Americans are behind much of the world when it comes to using ingenuity to solve the problem. There are about 20 different scientific and technological solutions that have been proposed, most of them have come from Europe.
● So as you can see, the global warming issue confuses me. I could be wrong as I clearly do not know a lot about it but generally it just does not seem to make sense.
The climate is phenomenally complicated, it’s necessary to have quite a bit of background information before it starts to make sense and the pieces fit together. It is not something that can be learned from the media, friends, internet blogs etc. There are about a dozen people here on Answers that sufficiently understand the mechanisms involved, most of these people have degrees and doctorates in relevant subjects.
● Thanks in advance for answering and giving your opinion.
You’re welcome. I know there’s a lot of points that I mentioned, please feel free to ask if you want clarification or more details about any of these issues.
====
====
Dawei
<>
The 1.3 F rise that we have seen so far is not what people are concerned about. It (obviously) has not caused too much destruction so far. It is the potential of a future, significant warming that people are concerned about, of something like 3 or 4 C by the end of the century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Global_Warming_Predictions.png
<
The difference between an ice age climate and that of an interglacial (which is what we are in today) is only about 5 or 6 C.
http://envstudies.brown.edu/oldsite/Thesis/2001/rowland/Images/TempCO2.jpg
It doesn't sound like a huge difference, but it is enough to completely change the climate. An ice age Earth looks completely different from an interglacial one.
As you can see from the above, we do have somewhat reliable ways of figuring out how temperatures have changed even though we don't have direct instrument measurements. This is done through using proxies, such as tree rings or studying the ratio of oxygen isotopes trapped in air bubbles from ice cores. Using several different, independent proxies and comparing their results is a good way to have confidence in their accuracy, as you can see here:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/ipcc2007/fig6-10b.png
<
Your friends are wrong. It always happens that some places feel colder than usual or hotter than usual. The climate is complicated, but all it really takes to have a colder than usual winter is for a cold air mass to roll down to wherever you are from the North. Even though this winter was very cold for some places, globally it was still the warmest Jan-Feb-March ever recorded.
April 2010 was the warmest April ever recorded. Yet many places were still quite chilly compared to what they usually are, such as much of China, Japan, and Korea. This is true every month. http://goo.gl/L2Gck
====
====
Antarcticice
A warning for all: don't waste your bandwidth on Harvs link it has noting to do with the subject from either side and is pure trolling. If trolls have to post this rubbish they could at least use someone who can actually sing. Back to the question
--------------------------------------…
You don't supply a link or mention who said temperatures were going up 'exponentially' so it's hard to make a comment on such unsupported statements.
As far as temperature goes 1.3 deg as a global average rise in just a century is a quite a marked rise given that the average temperature only has to rise about 8 deg for the planet to be ice free. The 1.3 is and average the rate of warming in the Arctic is almost twice this rate, which is why this is happening.
http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100504_Figure3.png
Just a few weeks ago deniers were crowing that the Arctic had returned to normal (after a cold Northern Winter) it was explained to them that this was a short term event and would melt quickly as Summer returned, which is exactly what happened and now they have gone very quite on the subject.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
As far as it only rising 1deg a century that is not the likely case if the science is correct and our GH gas emissions are to blame those emissions are going up at an 'exponential rate' (this time the use of the word is correct) if we act and reduce our current emissions by changing technologies for transport and energy we may hold the temperature increase to 2 deg if we don't then we face the likelihood of rises of more like 3-5 deg which would have marked affects on both global weather systems and sea level rise.
We know from historical tidal records that historic sea level rise was (over the last century was ~1.7mm per year and that rate almost doubled in the early 1990's
http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm#SeaLevel
Deniers will tell you that sea level has been rising since the end of the last ice age and it is certainly true that levels did rise significantly, as can be seen here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
but this slowed significantly ~7000 years ago and more or less stopped ~2000 years ago. If seas had been rising, using the smaller (1.7mm) figure, for the last 2000 years sea levels would have risen 3.4m, they didn't. Which on the graph above would be a line at near 45degs line instead of the flat line shown.
====
====
MTRstudent
Dawei and antarcticice covered it well!
A few other bits: we can estimate temperature from thousands of years ago by doing things like counting the ratio between different isotopes of oxygen in ice cores AND in sediment cores (bit of rock dug up from the floor of the ocean, made from shells etc all squashed together). In sediment cores they can count the different types of foraminifera, little critters with shells that either curl left or right; one type dominates in cold water, the other in warm water.
Anyway, people tested both and came up with a history; they put them side by side and they matched, so they're probably quite reliable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MilankovitchCyclesOrbitandCores.png
(bottom shows 'benthic forams,' those little critters from sediment cores, vs ice cores using oxygen isotope data). An ice age appears to be about 4-6C cooler than today.
Every doubling of CO2 is believed to cause 2-4.5C of warming, with a best estimate of 3C:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-change-little-ice-age-medieval-warm-period.htm
and if we didn't do anything, we'd probs do TWO doublings, i.e. 6C of _global_ warming: more than the difference between today and Scotland being covered in ice.
The warming is sort of going exponentially: we expect temperature rise to continue accelerating, but it will seem very slow to begin with. We raised temperatures 0.17C from the '90s to the '00s. We expect this to slowly increase, but you'll still probably only see ~0.02C rise temperature a year for a couple of decades yet. The solar cycle causes ~0.1C of cooling or warming in about 5 years, and El Nino can cause 0.4C of change in months. This makes it very hard to pick out if you look at very short trends (less than a decade, or maybe even 2):
http://www.skepticalscience.com/1998-DIY-Statistics.html
on top of that, you have the confusion between weather and climate. It's been chilly in N Europe and the USA over the winter, but Canada, the Pacific, S America, S Atlantic, Australia, India, Middle East, Africa, Indian Ocean, Tibet and SE Asia were all warm.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
FAITH AND POLITICS: The Rise of the Religious Right and Its Impact on American Domestic and Foreign Policy
FAITH AND POLITICS: The Rise of the Religious Right and Its Impact on American Domestic and Foreign Policy
http://www.trinity.utoronto.ca/UserFiles/Document/Halton-LS-Lectures.pdf
http://www.trinity.utoronto.ca/UserFiles/Document/Halton-LS-Lectures.pdf
History of Christian Violence and Intolerance
History of Christian Violence and Intolerance
The process of Christianization has at times been relatively peaceful and at times has been a very violent process, ranging from political conversions to adopt Christianity to military campaigns to force conversion onto native populaces often resulting in massacres and murder.
The Crusades 1095...
The Inquisition 1184....
Reformation 1518.....
Witch Hunts 1480......
The Holocaust 1933: Christian Fundamentalism
The Christian Identity Movement 1915: Anglo-Israelism, British-Israelism, and some white supremacists, anti-semitic and other hate groups.
Timeline: Christianity violence in history
http://goo.gl/roNjI
VIOLENCE IN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY
by J. Denny Weaver
"....It is not difficult to see why discussion of the relationship of violence and Christianity is controversial.(1) When asked whether Christianity supports violence and is a violent religion, does one answer "Of course -- look at the crusades, the multiple blessings of wars, warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men, and more"?....
This essay addresses the relationship between violence and Christianity by examining aspects of Christian theology. Specifically, it examines violence and assumptions of violence in the classic formulations of the central Christian doctrines of atonement and Christology. While this analysis finds classic theology in large part guilty of accommodating and supporting violence, the essay also points to a specifically nonviolent Christian answer..." continued: http://goo.gl/KV8Ex
The process of Christianization has at times been relatively peaceful and at times has been a very violent process, ranging from political conversions to adopt Christianity to military campaigns to force conversion onto native populaces often resulting in massacres and murder.
The Crusades 1095...
The Inquisition 1184....
Reformation 1518.....
Witch Hunts 1480......
The Holocaust 1933: Christian Fundamentalism
The Christian Identity Movement 1915: Anglo-Israelism, British-Israelism, and some white supremacists, anti-semitic and other hate groups.
Timeline: Christianity violence in history
http://goo.gl/roNjI
VIOLENCE IN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY
by J. Denny Weaver
"....It is not difficult to see why discussion of the relationship of violence and Christianity is controversial.(1) When asked whether Christianity supports violence and is a violent religion, does one answer "Of course -- look at the crusades, the multiple blessings of wars, warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men, and more"?....
This essay addresses the relationship between violence and Christianity by examining aspects of Christian theology. Specifically, it examines violence and assumptions of violence in the classic formulations of the central Christian doctrines of atonement and Christology. While this analysis finds classic theology in large part guilty of accommodating and supporting violence, the essay also points to a specifically nonviolent Christian answer..." continued: http://goo.gl/KV8Ex
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Mayor Palin: A Rough Record - TIME
Mayor Palin: A Rough Record
Mayor Palin: A Rough Record
By Nathan Thornburgh / Wasilla, Alaska Tuesday, Sep. 02, 2008
http://goo.gl/OEMrF
Gov. Sarah Palin background
http://goo.gl/BrXLl
sarah palin site:adn.com
http://goo.gl/Uzy43
Mayor Palin: A Rough Record
By Nathan Thornburgh / Wasilla, Alaska Tuesday, Sep. 02, 2008
http://goo.gl/OEMrF
Gov. Sarah Palin background
http://goo.gl/BrXLl
sarah palin site:adn.com
http://goo.gl/Uzy43
Michele Bachmann - short list bio
Michele Bachmann - short list bio
Education:
LLM, Tax Law, College of William and Mary
(citation needed, no such degree offered ?)
JD, Oral Roberts University
BA, Winona State University
Religion: Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod ( http://goo.gl/usts9 )
Professional Experience:
Owner, Mental Health Care Practice, present
Federal Tax Litigation Attorney
Political Experience:
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2006-present
Assistant Minority Leader, Minnesota State Senate, 2006
Senator, Minnesota State Senate, 2000-2006
Organizations:
Member, Advisory Board, Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute
Foster Parent
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Tea Party Caucus
Committees:
Financial Services, Member
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Member
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Financial Services), Member
....
Michele Bachmann on the issues: http://goo.gl/Cy7bE
....
What has Michele Bachmann accomplished?
http://goo.gl/95Db
Michele Bachmann: "I am in the deep minority in Congress and a fairly new freshman, so I don't have substantive bills that I have passed. I would love to."
....
Representative Michele Bachmann (MN)
http://goo.gl/GtNVx
All Votes To date: http://goo.gl/EiqWi
Sponsors and Co-Sponsors: http://goo.gl/vbBeb
Public statements of Representative Michele Bachmann
http://goo.gl/6w6xu
Education:
LLM, Tax Law, College of William and Mary
(citation needed, no such degree offered ?)
JD, Oral Roberts University
BA, Winona State University
Religion: Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod ( http://goo.gl/usts9 )
Professional Experience:
Owner, Mental Health Care Practice, present
Federal Tax Litigation Attorney
Political Experience:
Representative, United States House of Representatives, 2006-present
Assistant Minority Leader, Minnesota State Senate, 2006
Senator, Minnesota State Senate, 2000-2006
Organizations:
Member, Advisory Board, Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute
Foster Parent
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Tea Party Caucus
Committees:
Financial Services, Member
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Member
Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, Member
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Financial Services), Member
....
Michele Bachmann on the issues: http://goo.gl/Cy7bE
....
What has Michele Bachmann accomplished?
http://goo.gl/95Db
Michele Bachmann: "I am in the deep minority in Congress and a fairly new freshman, so I don't have substantive bills that I have passed. I would love to."
....
Representative Michele Bachmann (MN)
http://goo.gl/GtNVx
All Votes To date: http://goo.gl/EiqWi
Sponsors and Co-Sponsors: http://goo.gl/vbBeb
Public statements of Representative Michele Bachmann
http://goo.gl/6w6xu
Sarah Palin - short list bio
Sarah Palin - short list bio
Education:
BS, Communications/Journalism, University of Idaho, 1987
Professional Experience:
Contributor, Fox News Network, 2010-present
Owner, Commercial Fishing Business
Sports Reporter, KTVA-TV, Anchorage
Sports Reporter, KUU-TV, Anchorage
Sports Reporter, Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman
Pageant (after high school) [1]
Author (memoir) [2]
Political Experience:
Governor, State of Alaska, 2006-2009
Candidate, United States Vice President, 2008
Former President, Alaska Conference of Mayors
Former Mayor/Manager, Wasilla City
Former Council Member, Wasilla City Council
Organizations:
Member, Alaska Miners Association
Member, Alaska Outdoor Council
Member, Alaska Resource Development Council
Member, Chambers of Commerce (Various)
Member, Iditarod Parent-Teacher Association
Life Member, National Rifle Association
Founder, Sarah Political Action Committee
Member, Valley Hospital Association Board
Coach/Hockey Team Manager, Valley Youth Sports
Member, Wasilla Bible Church
Member, Youth Court Steering Committee
Former Member, American Management Association
Former Member, Salvation Army Board
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-2004
Former Member, Alaska Municipal League Board
Former Chair, Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Former Vice Chair, National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee
[1] wore the crown of Miss Wasilla in 1984, was the runner-up in the Miss Alaska contest.
[2] Going rogue: an American life (memoir), America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag (memoir ? - citation needed )
Education:
BS, Communications/Journalism, University of Idaho, 1987
Professional Experience:
Contributor, Fox News Network, 2010-present
Owner, Commercial Fishing Business
Sports Reporter, KTVA-TV, Anchorage
Sports Reporter, KUU-TV, Anchorage
Sports Reporter, Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman
Pageant (after high school) [1]
Author (memoir) [2]
Political Experience:
Governor, State of Alaska, 2006-2009
Candidate, United States Vice President, 2008
Former President, Alaska Conference of Mayors
Former Mayor/Manager, Wasilla City
Former Council Member, Wasilla City Council
Organizations:
Member, Alaska Miners Association
Member, Alaska Outdoor Council
Member, Alaska Resource Development Council
Member, Chambers of Commerce (Various)
Member, Iditarod Parent-Teacher Association
Life Member, National Rifle Association
Founder, Sarah Political Action Committee
Member, Valley Hospital Association Board
Coach/Hockey Team Manager, Valley Youth Sports
Member, Wasilla Bible Church
Member, Youth Court Steering Committee
Former Member, American Management Association
Former Member, Salvation Army Board
Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Chair, Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, 2003-2004
Former Member, Alaska Municipal League Board
Former Chair, Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Former Vice Chair, National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee
[1] wore the crown of Miss Wasilla in 1984, was the runner-up in the Miss Alaska contest.
[2] Going rogue: an American life (memoir), America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith, and Flag (memoir ? - citation needed )
Obama - short list bio
Obama - short list bio
Education:
JD, Harvard Law School, 1991
BA, Columbia University, 1983
Attended, Occidental College
Professional Experience:
Community Organizer, Chicago, 1985
Attorney, Sidley and Austin
Professor, Constitutional Law, University of Chicago
Author [1]
Lecturer
Political Experience:
President, United States of America, 2008-present
Senator, United States Senate, 2005-2008
Keynote Speaker, Democratic National Convention, 2004
Senator, Illinois State Senate, 1996-2004
Organizations:
Center for Neighborhood and Technology
Chicago Annenberg Challenge
Cook County Bar
Cook County Bar Association Community Law Project
President, Harvard Law Review
Board Member, Joyce Foundation
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law
Leadership for Quality Education
Board Member, Woods Fund of Chicago
[1] "Dreams From my Father" and "The Audacity of Hope.", "Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters (audio)"
====
2008 Election
Obama (e) 365 - 53% - (p) 66,882,230mil
McCain (e) 173 - 46% - (p) 58,343,671mil
other 1%
Presidential exit of office (approval Lows)
GW Bush 25
Clinton 37
GHW Bush 29
Reagan 35
Carter 28
Ford 37
Nixon 24
http://goo.gl/TSTNA
Education:
JD, Harvard Law School, 1991
BA, Columbia University, 1983
Attended, Occidental College
Professional Experience:
Community Organizer, Chicago, 1985
Attorney, Sidley and Austin
Professor, Constitutional Law, University of Chicago
Author [1]
Lecturer
Political Experience:
President, United States of America, 2008-present
Senator, United States Senate, 2005-2008
Keynote Speaker, Democratic National Convention, 2004
Senator, Illinois State Senate, 1996-2004
Organizations:
Center for Neighborhood and Technology
Chicago Annenberg Challenge
Cook County Bar
Cook County Bar Association Community Law Project
President, Harvard Law Review
Board Member, Joyce Foundation
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law
Leadership for Quality Education
Board Member, Woods Fund of Chicago
[1] "Dreams From my Father" and "The Audacity of Hope.", "Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters (audio)"
====
2008 Election
Obama (e) 365 - 53% - (p) 66,882,230mil
McCain (e) 173 - 46% - (p) 58,343,671mil
other 1%
Presidential exit of office (approval Lows)
GW Bush 25
Clinton 37
GHW Bush 29
Reagan 35
Carter 28
Ford 37
Nixon 24
http://goo.gl/TSTNA
beeline - bee wise. bee natural. beeline
beeline - bee wise. bee natural. beeline
Sweet Beginnings, LLC makes the family of beeline® products, an all natural line of raw honey and honey-infused body care products. We extract our honey from our all natural urban apiary in the heart of the North Lawndale community in Chicago. Our honey is known for its complex flavor, a result of the varied flora of our urban environment. Our beeline® skin care products are of exceptional quality and are all unique in their use of the natural gift of honey as a moisturizer. Not only do we respect the earth in the production of our products, but we also provide important transitional job opportunities for area residents who struggle with barriers to employment....http://www.sweetbeginningsllc.com
Sweet Beginnings, LLC makes the family of beeline® products, an all natural line of raw honey and honey-infused body care products. We extract our honey from our all natural urban apiary in the heart of the North Lawndale community in Chicago. Our honey is known for its complex flavor, a result of the varied flora of our urban environment. Our beeline® skin care products are of exceptional quality and are all unique in their use of the natural gift of honey as a moisturizer. Not only do we respect the earth in the production of our products, but we also provide important transitional job opportunities for area residents who struggle with barriers to employment....http://www.sweetbeginningsllc.com
Natural selection and principled prejudice
Natural selection and principled prejudice
Only a very brave or a very foolish person would claim to have no prejudices....
“Discrimination” is one of the most ambiguous words in English. We respect the “discriminating wine connoisseur”, but revile those who discriminate on the basis of gender or race. The distinction goes beyond mere semantics, and seems to lie in whether or not discrimination is on the basis of principled judgement. Is it just our nature or a moral choice?
Monday, March 21, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
ACORN O'Keefe controversy - digg forum 03/20/2011
ACORN O'Keefe controversy - digg forum 03/20/2011
Re-post nov 27 2010
http://goo.gl/yXpKs
And the Pimp issue was dismissed.....
The ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy started in September 2009 when conservative activists Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe publicized selectively edited hidden camera recordings through Fox News and Andrew Breitbart's website BigGovernment.com.
On December 7, 2009, the former Massachusetts Attorney General, after an independent internal investigation of ACORN, found the videos that had been released appeared to have been edited, "in some cases substantially". He found no evidence of criminal conduct by ACORN employees, but concluded that ACORN had poor management practices that contributed to unprofessional actions by a number of its low-level employees. On March 1, 2010, the District Attorney's office for Brooklyn determined that the videos were "heavily edited" and concluded that there was no criminal wrongdoing by the ACORN staff in the videos from the Brooklyn ACORN office. On April, 1, 2010, an investigation by the California Attorney General found the videos from Los Angeles, San Diego and San Bernardino to be "heavily edited,"and the investigation did not find evidence of criminal conduct on the part of ACORN employees. On June 14, 2010, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its findings which showed that ACORN evidenced no sign that it, or any of its related organizations, mishandled any federal money they had received.
There was some dishonestly but overall the organization was cleared. Shame what happens to reputations when people [ news ] jump the gun or employee's doing stupid stuff causes problems for all, but its difficult to find traditional journalist and/or good trustworthy worker willing to work for little or nothing.
Re-branding by ACORN leadership
ACORN International changed its name in 2010 to Community Organizations International
http://www.communityorganizationsinternational.org
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Community-Organizations-International/96066954203
California ACORN changed its name to Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment
http://www.calorganize.org
New York ACORN renamed itself New York Communities for Change
http://www.nycommunities.org
Acorn Housing changed its name to Affordable Housing Centers of America
https://secure.ahcoa.org
None has retained the same tax and employee identification numbers that it held under its former name.
ACORN Workers Cleared in NYC Pimp Video
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/02/acorn-workers-cleared-nyc-prostitute-video/
Preliminary report clears ACORN on funds
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/14/congress.acorn/index.html
ACORN Videos Bring Problems to Group but Not Criminal Charges
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/02/acorn-videos-bring-problems-group-criminal-charges/
Brooklyn prosecutors clear local ACORN office
An investigation finds James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles edited their tape to make ACORN look worse
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/03/01/acorn_cleared
Damaging Brooklyn ACORN Sting Video Ruled ‘Heavily Edited,’ No Charges to Be Filed
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/03/damaging_brooklyn_acorn_sting.html
ACORN Workers Cleared Of Illegality By Outside Probe
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/12/acorn_workers_cleared_of_illeg.html
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released the following report and correspondence: http://www.gao.gov/daybook/100614.htm
3. Preliminary Observations on Funding, Oversight, and Investigations and Prosecutions of ACORN or Potentially Related Organizations. GAO-10-648R, June 14. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10648r.pdf
Judge Instructs Fed Agencies to Resume ACORN Funding
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/12/judge_instructs_fed_agencies_to_resume
Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. CA. Office
http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/multimedia/index.php
NPQ on ACORN Investigation Results
http://www.nonprofitquarterly.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1654:npq-on-acorn-investigation-results&catid=58:npq-in-the-news&Itemid=54
James O'Keefe
He was arrested Monday in what the FBI alleges was a plot to "interfere with a telephone system" in the office of Democratic U.S. Sen. Mary L. Landrieu in New Orleans. According to federal court records, O'Keefe admitted that he worked with three accomplices, two of whom entered Landrieu's office posing as telephone repairmen while O'Keefe recorded them with his cellphone camera. If convicted, the four face up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
O'Keefe was in legal trouble before now. When he and fellow conservative activist Hannah Giles posed as a pimp and a prostitute and secretly videotaped conversations with ACORN employees last summer, they may have been violating laws in several states........
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/28/opinion/la-ed-okeefe28-2010jan28
Video released by conservative activist O'Keefe claims to show undercover footage at NJEA conference http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/10/video_released_by_conservative.html
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/01/nj_activist_james_okeefe_touts.html
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/06/nj_activist_james_okeefe_makes.html
...he could have done honest investigative work, without the need to break fed/state laws or doctor evidence.
"...ACORN is gone..."
Technically yes, the "ACORN" (business/name/branding) is Defunct, however, same people, same business, same employee's, same goals, same government support, etc.....are now known as:
ACORN International changed its name in 2010 to Community Organizations International.
California ACORN changed its name to Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment
New York ACORN renamed itself New York Communities for Change
Acorn Housing changed its name to Affordable Housing Centers of America
( several retained the same tax and employee identification numbers that it held under its former name. )
Other branches of ACORN as done the same across the US.
See also:
Acorn - non-profit quarterly
http://goo.gl/zdlQ7
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/23/acorn_sues_okeefe_giles_and_br.html
http://gawker.com/#!5508190/okeefe-and-breitbart-acorn-videos-severely-edited
Fact Check - ACORN - http://goo.gl/RFNmY
Winner - DIGG Troll Comments of the Week
Winner - Troll Comment of the Week
http://goo.gl/9Sgpx
http://goo.gl/9Sgpx
All ACORN did, aside from abet under age sex slavery and help pimps commit tax fraud, was bus the bedrock of the Democrat party to the polls. In my mind giving happy meals, gin money, and fist fuls of Newports to the drunks, mental defectives, and felons in order to purchase their vote isn't a public service,
--- Misu Forum Babble
@phoenixtx BrycePainter
"...been caught stealing personal emails and breaking over 100 peoples right to privacy...." -- phoenixtx
Just curious, I've skimmed several threads and read various posts elsewhere...there seems to be a claim here of illegal or criminal activity. I'm assuming you have a solid case ? if so, would you mind answering the following ?
1) have formal criminal charges been made ? or been discharged/dismissed ?
1a) if so, what is the current status of said charges ?
2) what are the [detailed] charges ?
3) filed in: police dept. + phone - court name, city, state, zip, phone and pending docket number if available.
4) filed complaints elsewhere ? ( 1 - 3 if applicable )
I'm interested in reviewing/following the case.
---
"Do you not have the balls to respond? Man up punk. Time is subjective. We here for the long haul you candy ass.....Give us a response you puss. Come on boy. Show some of that cold dead liberal heart that you cling to." -- phoenixtx
As for the above comment - disgraceful - you said it so don't bark back...
Prime example of poor parenting and/or failure in the educational system.
http://goo.gl/9Sgpx
This database documents the Digg Patriots, a covert ultra-conservative effort to suppress liberal views and promote extremist right-wing propaganda on the social news site Digg.
http://goo.gl/DNIri
====
http://goo.gl/mhoUp
@BrycePainter
"You're an idiot. pretentious drooling idiot. Why don't your friends help you out and tell you these things / I'm sorry. I didn't think. you don't have any friends do you ?" -- BrycePainter
Now, lets see wittle-one, so far I have reviewed spew after spew of BS, outright lies, unjustified slander, childish commenting, rude and careless commenting...I can go on if you like, by you and a few others. During this time I have been respectful in an debatable tone, seeking answers to your accusations, point of view and/or at least break you away from one-line-zingers of hate and ignorance, long enough to obtain something useful. I have yet to use derogatory names or as you seem to do - just about ever thread, bully others - shameful. I find your response to be of the lowest standard, thus a disgrace. People engage in conversation [debate] on digg, we do not always agree with each other, but overall we show respect...to game a service in order to silence is pathetic to say the least, and let me explain why: it shows a complete lack of intellect, can't defend a stance/point of view..so next best thing is to make respectable users miserable and/or spam decent threads..that getting the msg out responsibly. Now really...you resort to lack of friend slander ? really ? pull that diaper out of your crack wittle-one and grow up.... But to answer your pointless question, I'm an Adult and we adults don't really have "friend status" or "friend ratings", we have friends, co-workers, employee's, etc... though I have to admit between running a successful business, various side projects, I really don't have time for any.......but I do understand for some like yourself it is important. Far as Digg or other forums go, I have conversations/debates from time to time..but overall I don't make friends, if I do fine, granted I have been active in forum/chat dating back to BBS and early IRC (when there were only three main servers, and 900 baud modems )..over the years my contact list has grown, but again not something I measure or rate. I asked you a question in regard to criminal charges based on this: before the other day [this thread] I really haven't noticed the DP pest [past] problem or probably just didn't care. So after reviewing conversations, news reports, youtube vids, asking a few admins about it, etc....I noticed that you and a few others keep on and on and on about what appears to be or sounds like criminal behavior accusations, directed at several decent-respectful digg users, of course you guys are not bias..you'll be jerks to anyone in opposition. I'm [ I was ] interested in and assume charges have [had] been submitted..otherwise I can not understand the "festering of babble". I do wish you best of luck and hopefully whatever is really eating at you deep inside, that low self-esteem will work itself out as you mature..I out grew many bad habits and counterproductive views myself.
Calling me an "Idiot" ? I'll not dignify that with an response....other than, care to compare my degree(s) [plural] to yours ?
Look, in all sincerity, get some anger management therapy and truly best of luck in the real world......
-- best regards
====
====
....anger & hate speech is ignorance and ignorance can be cured...
....and friends: http://goo.gl/o1mFq
--- Misu Forum Babble
@phoenixtx BrycePainter
"...been caught stealing personal emails and breaking over 100 peoples right to privacy...." -- phoenixtx
Just curious, I've skimmed several threads and read various posts elsewhere...there seems to be a claim here of illegal or criminal activity. I'm assuming you have a solid case ? if so, would you mind answering the following ?
1) have formal criminal charges been made ? or been discharged/dismissed ?
1a) if so, what is the current status of said charges ?
2) what are the [detailed] charges ?
3) filed in: police dept. + phone - court name, city, state, zip, phone and pending docket number if available.
4) filed complaints elsewhere ? ( 1 - 3 if applicable )
I'm interested in reviewing/following the case.
---
"Do you not have the balls to respond? Man up punk. Time is subjective. We here for the long haul you candy ass.....Give us a response you puss. Come on boy. Show some of that cold dead liberal heart that you cling to." -- phoenixtx
As for the above comment - disgraceful - you said it so don't bark back...
Prime example of poor parenting and/or failure in the educational system.
http://goo.gl/9Sgpx
This database documents the Digg Patriots, a covert ultra-conservative effort to suppress liberal views and promote extremist right-wing propaganda on the social news site Digg.
http://goo.gl/DNIri
====
http://goo.gl/mhoUp
@BrycePainter
"You're an idiot. pretentious drooling idiot. Why don't your friends help you out and tell you these things / I'm sorry. I didn't think. you don't have any friends do you ?" -- BrycePainter
Now, lets see wittle-one, so far I have reviewed spew after spew of BS, outright lies, unjustified slander, childish commenting, rude and careless commenting...I can go on if you like, by you and a few others. During this time I have been respectful in an debatable tone, seeking answers to your accusations, point of view and/or at least break you away from one-line-zingers of hate and ignorance, long enough to obtain something useful. I have yet to use derogatory names or as you seem to do - just about ever thread, bully others - shameful. I find your response to be of the lowest standard, thus a disgrace. People engage in conversation [debate] on digg, we do not always agree with each other, but overall we show respect...to game a service in order to silence is pathetic to say the least, and let me explain why: it shows a complete lack of intellect, can't defend a stance/point of view..so next best thing is to make respectable users miserable and/or spam decent threads..that getting the msg out responsibly. Now really...you resort to lack of friend slander ? really ? pull that diaper out of your crack wittle-one and grow up.... But to answer your pointless question, I'm an Adult and we adults don't really have "friend status" or "friend ratings", we have friends, co-workers, employee's, etc... though I have to admit between running a successful business, various side projects, I really don't have time for any.......but I do understand for some like yourself it is important. Far as Digg or other forums go, I have conversations/debates from time to time..but overall I don't make friends, if I do fine, granted I have been active in forum/chat dating back to BBS and early IRC (when there were only three main servers, and 900 baud modems )..over the years my contact list has grown, but again not something I measure or rate. I asked you a question in regard to criminal charges based on this: before the other day [this thread] I really haven't noticed the DP pest [past] problem or probably just didn't care. So after reviewing conversations, news reports, youtube vids, asking a few admins about it, etc....I noticed that you and a few others keep on and on and on about what appears to be or sounds like criminal behavior accusations, directed at several decent-respectful digg users, of course you guys are not bias..you'll be jerks to anyone in opposition. I'm [ I was ] interested in and assume charges have [had] been submitted..otherwise I can not understand the "festering of babble". I do wish you best of luck and hopefully whatever is really eating at you deep inside, that low self-esteem will work itself out as you mature..I out grew many bad habits and counterproductive views myself.
Calling me an "Idiot" ? I'll not dignify that with an response....other than, care to compare my degree(s) [plural] to yours ?
Look, in all sincerity, get some anger management therapy and truly best of luck in the real world......
-- best regards
====
I want Nancy to know I'm praying. Yes Nancy, I'm praying.
We're all living the nightmare of Obama. Obamacare is just one part. Barry's doing OK. He and Michelle and the kids just love South America and may even go back someday if they can get the taxpayers to foot the bill.
....anger & hate speech is ignorance and ignorance can be cured...
....and friends: http://goo.gl/o1mFq
Friday, March 18, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Monday, March 07, 2011
When Prophecies Fail
Few aspects of the Jehovah's Witness movement are more fascinating to the outside observer than their predictions of the end of the world.
Leon Festinger's Theory
In studying this phenomenon, credit must be given to Leon Festinger for his cognitive dissonance theory, as developed in his book When Prophecy Fails, originally published in 1956 and co-authored by Festinger, Henry W. Riecken and Stanley Schachter. The authors comprised a research team who conducted a study of a small cult-following of a Mrs. Marian Keech, a housewife who claimed to receive messages from aliens via automatic writing. The message of the aliens was one of a coming world cataclysm, but with the hope of surviving for the elect who listened to them through Keech and selected other mediums. What Festinger and his associates demonstrated in the end was that the failure of prophecy often has the opposite effect of what the average person might expect; the cult following often gets stronger and the members even more convinced of the truth of their actions and beliefs! This unique paradox is the focus of attention in this article, and will be later applied specifically to the Jehovah's Witness movement.....http://goo.gl/CzI35
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)