If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.

REQUIEM

Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010

1/31/2007

Johnny Can't Add or Subtract ...
But He Sure Does Love Polar Bears


As some of you know, my posting here will be less frequent, and probably more superficial, over the next couple of months, but I’m hoping you all will continue to visit now and then and add your comments to anything here, as well as respond to each others’ thoughts.

As an example of the ‘more superficial stuff’ that I’ll be offering here for a little while, for lack of time to spend on anything more serious, I submit the following four observations that I mentally catalogued within just the past few weeks – without comment – as microcosmic evidence of what I believe is representative of what is happening in America 2007, in education in particular, although its tentacles reach into all segments of our society. This is why I created this weblog: to discuss America’s decline, and perhaps come up with a strategy to awaken those who are unaware of what we have lost, and the price we will pay if we continue to travel this dismal path, with our every move choreographed by those who despise liberty and justice, and who believe themselves to be members of a ruling elite, to whom power over others is a privilege not to be denied.

They are attempting to demean, degrade, and dumb us down as a people, through our education system, our entertainment choices and our channels of information, and by restricting our liberties through oppressive taxation, laws and judicial fiat.

I do not believe that the following four occurrences are aberrations. I believe they are typical of what is happening in education today. Yes, there are young people who strive to excel, and who thirst to learn, in spite of the counterfeit ‘education’ that is offered to them. But too many young people, and their families behind the scenes, are too otherwise occupied to realize, let alone do anything about, the fact that education in America is not what it used to be, nor what it should be.

Much of what is ‘taught’ these days in the public school classroom, and in so-called higher education, is leftist propaganda, and the basics … necessary for the survival of a free, civilized society … be damned.

Likewise, the teaching methods used today rely more on providing a pre-ordained, robotic road map, rather than inspiring original thought or critical thinking. Most young products of the modern American public education system, if not provided a familiar, by-rote ‘go from A to B to C’ outline as to how to solve a problem, do not possess the tools to discover, or invent, the answer to anything.

- I -

I am tutoring (in statistics) a former piano student who is now a sophomore at a local campus of Penn State. Dustin is perhaps the most diligent, hard-working, ambitious young man I have ever known. From the time he was twelve years old, he has purchased, or salvaged, broken down farm tractors and brought them back into working order. The profits he has made in doing that for the past eight years, as well as performing countless odd jobs with his Dad (moving entire households, interior/exterior house painting, small construction work, etc.), have paid for the first two years of his college education.

During this week’s lesson, Dustin told me that a good portion of the students in his statistics class are minorities, some of whom are attending school on minority government grants/loans. There are twenty-six students in his class, and the large majority of them bring no book, no paper, and no pencil to class. They slouch down in their chairs, and simply stare at the instructor, or out the window, the entire class.

The fellow who sits next to him does not turn his cell phone off during class, and it generally rings two or three times during each class period – the ring tone being a vulgar rap ‘song’, words and all. The instructor (a capable young woman with a thick Indian accent, who, Dustin says, appears to be very intelligent and dedicated to teaching well, but her accent makes it difficult to understand her) has never mustered the courage to tell him to turn it off.

Last week the students were given one week’s time to take a half-hour on-line quiz. The day after the quiz deadline, the instructor came into the class and said that she would be extending the deadline for taking the quiz two more days, because only fourteen of the twenty-six people in the class had bothered to go on-line and take it.

Question:

Why is a hard-working, ambitious student finding himself stifled and distracted by other students who apparently have no desire to learn or succeed? And why are some of the latter attending (and apparently doing no more than attending) college on your and my tax dollars?

- II -

A few nights ago, Rick and I were watching the quiz show ‘The Weakest Link’ for the first (and last) time. The contestants were eight college juniors and seniors, each one from a ‘respected’ college/university. Toward the middle of the program, one of the girls was asked, ‘In what century did World War II occur?’

She responded, ‘The 70s.’

Question:

In my college generation (the late 60s/early 70s) it would have been virtually impossible to find a college junior who did not know what a century is, or when World War II occurred. What are college students studying these days that leaves them little time to learn the history of their republic?

- III -

Our son, Dan, teaches physics at a vo-tech high school, and has been teaching a unit on nuclear energy in his physics classes for the past two years. The large majority of Dan’s classes are original and involve significant hands-on study, and the requiring of creative thought and in-depth analysis.

As one of many examples of his assignments in this class, he would split the class up into groups, assign each group a fictitious power plant in a specific part of the country, and a specific amount and type of nuclear waste that required disposal from that plant. He would then also assign them a waste disposal site in another part of the country. Their assignment was then to determine how best to dispose of the waste (taking into account the health and environmental risks posed by the particular waste, transport safety considerations, traffic and population considerations, local and state restrictions, etc.).

Before Dan began teaching at this school, there were only two physics classes offered. Now there are four, and there are waiting lists for all of them. His students are inspired by his teaching methods, his subject matter, and the relevance of what they learn.

He was told this year that, due to state mandates regarding subject matter to be taught in physics classes, he can no longer teach anything on nuclear energy, but must substitute, instead, other areas of physics pre-ordained by the state department of education.

Also, as a result of the state’s implementation of No Child Left Behind standards, the administration at the school is considering abolishing physics courses altogether in order to devote that portion of their science curriculum to meeting the NCLB general science requirements (which include increased emphasis on environmental studies).

Question:

In this particularly perilous time in American history, would young people most benefit from comprehending the basics behind nuclear energy and its uses and consequences, or the bogus theory behind most ‘environmental issues’? If the answer is the former, why are good physics teachers being forced to ignore timely and relevant subjects in deference to teaching a bogus theory based on fraudulent ‘science’?

- IV -

A third grade piano student of mine who enjoys telling me about her day before we begin each lesson came to her lesson a few weeks ago and told me that she has decided what she wants to do when she grows up. She wants to ‘save the polar bears’. When I asked her what made her so passionate about polar bears, she replied, ‘We are learning all about the bad things that we are doing to the polar bears and all other animals and plants because we are making the earth too hot for them. We have to stop putting things into the air that make the earth too hot, and I want to do that for the animals and plants.’

Question:

What is the difference between education and indoctrination? And beginning at what grade level is indoctrination acceptable? Should an eight-year old be concerning herself with the potential (manufactured) sad fate of the polar bear before she has learned to work with fractions, or the tragic story of the Civil War? Should a young citizen of a free country graduate from college expertly versed in the former and totally ignorant of the latter?

~ joanie

67 comments:

loubarakos said...

Joanie, I know you know the answers to all of your questions. Let's hope other people are asking them too. Good job!

kathymlynczak said...

My brother-in-law went back to college to become a teacher (He's in his early 40's) and just started teaching highschool math last year.

He says that some of the kids in his classes can't even do basic fractions and he wonders what they were taught through junior high and why they were even passed on to high school.

Remember years ago the "Why Johnny Can't Read" studies? What ever happened because we discovered that our students can't do all the things we used to be able to do at their age? Nothing!

Part of it is that teachers unions let them get away with anything now, including laziness. And part of it is the liberal agenda you're talking about Joanie.

stonemason said...

Good connections Joanie, all with a very sad theme.

robmaroni said...

Love yer title! And the rest ain't bad either. :>)

Anonymous said...

Thgis country is GONE.

Al said...

Education is down the toilet in this country.

You have given

---an example of the insanity of "college" as it exists today. Why doesn't the poor guy believe what he sees and chuck the "college" ?

--an example of TV. I will abstain from commenting on that since I refuse to watch TV.

---an example of your son trying to fight the system on the high school (?) level. I hope he has plans to do something in place of his job fighting the system in a setup that obviously doesn't want him.

---an example of the indoctrinated little kid.

What can I do about any of this?

Nothing--as far as I can see--

Except be thankful I am long finished with "school"

and don't have any direct contact with this insanity.

trustbutverify said...

What can I do about any of this?
Nothing--as far as I can see--Except be thankful I am long finished with "school" and don't have any direct contact with this insanity.


But your country's future depends on the caliber of the generations that follow you.

As the saying goes, "Be afraid. Be very afriad."

Anonymous said...

This is not "superficial" at all. These are good comments on a problem that is part of the plan to overturn freedom and destroy capitalism. There will always be people who think they know better than us what is best for us and they are in a majority in Washington now.

Anonymous said...

Well said, cw.

jim said...

The guy with the cell phone needs someone to take it away from him, and it shouldn't be the female teacher.

proudpodunknative said...

Good examples of the crap our kids are learning in the public schools and the way our college graduates aren't equipped to face the world. Thanks, Joanie.

3timesalady said...

The story about Dustin's class is sickening. Too many people are in college these days that don't belong there, and some of them are there on our dime!

Give your son our sympathies. He sounds like a great teacher who has to work under horrible bureaucratic conditions. Local school districts should be able to run their own schools but instead orders are handed down from the state and federal governments and then the local districts have to raise taxes to raise the money to meet those requirements.

Thanks Joanie.

MontyPython2 said...

"They are attempting to demean, degrade, and dumb us down as a people, through our education system, our entertainment choices and our channels of information, and by restricting our liberties through oppressive taxation, laws and judicial fiat."

You have their number. And if Hillary is elected in 08 they will take a giant leap toward that goal.

daveburkett said...

What can I do about any of this?

Nothing--as far as I can see--

Except be thankful I am long finished with "school"

and don't have any direct contact with this insanity.


But you're indirectly involved with it plenty. If you have children, they are being fed Marxist propaganda every day. If you have brothers or sisters who have children, their fate is the same. If you pay real estate taxes, your tax money is paying teachers who fill your neighborhood children's heads with lies. All of us are involved in this suicidal nightmare whether we like it or not.

Al said...

All true Dave,

as I said, "What can I do about it?"

I can ridicule and scare leftwingers whenever I come across them---which I do.

I can't do anything about the insane "college" that the guy who fixed tractors goes to.

If I ever came across him I'd say to him, "Listen, pal, why don't you listen to what you are saying about the so-called college classes you go to (and pay well for, I am sure)
and get the hell out of there.
BELIEVE what you see."

TV is garbage and anybody who exposes themselves to it deserves what they get. When I (rarely) turn on the TV, it makes my skin crawl to see what is on.

As for cw's poor son, it is obvious he is living on borrowed time at the "school" he is connected to.
The message is clear; his type of teaching is not wanted.
I can't offer him any advice because what I would do is take one of the adminstrators by the throat and give them a free "physics lesson" combined with an anotomy lesson on the nerves and breathing entities and blood vessels located in the throat.

As for the little girl, that is the most dispiriting. What if I told her that her polar bear stuff is horsesh*t. That wouldn't work. She has to "get along" with her teachers, her friends, the society she lives in. That is very important to most children, and certainly to little girls. They need to "belong."

That is by far the worst example of the four given, because it leaves one with the most complete feeling of hopelesness.

daveburkett said...

I can ridicule and scare leftwingers whenever I come across them---which I do.

So do I. It’s one of my favorite pastimes.

I can't do anything about the insane "college" that the guy who fixed tractors goes to. If I ever came across him I'd say to him, "Listen, pal, why don't you listen to what you are saying about the so-called college classes you go to (and pay well for, I am sure), and get the hell out of there. BELIEVE what you see."

There may be reasons he’s attending that school: distance from home, expense, etc. He may have to put up with the crap.

TV is garbage and anybody who exposes themselves to it deserves what they get. When I (rarely) turn on the TV, it makes my skin crawl to see what is on.

Agreed. I watch only 2 or 3 shows regularly, mostly on the History Channel.

As for cw's poor son, it is obvious he is living on borrowed time at the "school" he is connected to. The message is clear; his type of teaching is not wanted.
I can't offer him any advice because what I would do is take one of the adminstrators by the throat and give them a free "physics lesson" combined with an anotomy lesson on the nerves and breathing entities and blood vessels located in the throat.


Joanie has told me that he has his resume in to other schools, but that this school will keep him on no matter what, but he has to teach what they tell him to teach. He’ll be out of there soon by choice.

As for the little girl, that is the most dispiriting. What if I told her that her polar bear stuff is horsesh*t. That wouldn't work. She has to "get along" with her teachers, her friends, the society she lives in. That is very important to most children, and certainly to little girls. They need to "belong." That is by far the worst example of the four given, because it leaves one with the most complete feeling of hopelesness.

A young child doesn’t want to buck the system and when the system is corrupt it’s up to her parents to step in somehow. I suspect her parents are just like most these days, totally unaware of what’s being done to their daughter.

Anonymous said...

Chew on this cw:

http://www.healthpolitics.org/archives.asp?previous=latest_on_globalwarming&spg=PPC

johnsteever said...

Take a gander at this propaganda aimed at kids like your little pupil---

http://www.coolkidsforacoolclimate.com/Causes&Effects/PolarBearExtinction.htm

robmaroni said...

Happy birthday, Joanie.

And here's to many many more!

Anonymous said...

Here’s an excellent Cato article on the physics of so called global warming. Your son ought to teach this kind of "global warming" to his classes.

--

Current models all predict that warmer climates will be accompanied by increasing humidity at all levels. As already noted, such behavior is an artifact of the models since they have neither the physics nor the numerical accuracy to deal with water vapor.

Recent studies of the physics of how deep clouds moisturize the atmosphere strongly suggest that this largest of the positive feedbacks is not only negative, but very large.

Not only are there major reasons to believe that models are exaggerating the response to increasing carbon dioxide, but, perhaps even more significantly, the models' predictions for the past century incorrectly describe the pattern of warming and greatly overestimate its magnitude.

--

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html

GaryBurgess said...

Boss essay, Joanie! I think we all come across these kinds of things all the time but we don't always take the time to connect the dots. Teachers and what they teach can't compare to years ago. The teachers unions are responsible for a lot of it. If we got rid of the NEA and the AFT, half the battle would be won.

(Happy b-day! What is it, 39?) (g)

Jane and Donna said...

http://www.blumenhardung.de/images/xsamtseid_l.jpg

Happy Birthday!

(Watch the mail!)

Sandra said...

LEADING CANADIAN POLAR BEAR BIOLOGIST, Dr Mitchell Taylor, wrote recently,

"Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present.”

Dr Mitchell Taylor, Dept. of the Environment, Government of Nunavut, in

The Toronto Star, May 1, 2006.

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20060505/20060505_17.html

Last stand of our wild polar bears

Silly to predict their demise
Starling conclusion to say they will disappear within 25 years and surprise to many researchers
May 1, 2006.

by Dr. Mitchell Taylor

The Toronto Star

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146433819696&call_pageid=970599119419

Tim Flannery is one of Australia's best-known scientists and authors. That doesn't mean what he says is correct or accurate. That was clearly demonstrated when he recently ventured into the subject of climate change and polar bears. Climate change is threatening to drive polar bears into extinction within 25 years, according to Flannery. That is a startling conclusion and certainly is a surprising revelation to the polar bear researchers who work here and to the people who live here. We really had no idea.

The evidence for climate change effects on polar bears described by Flannery is incorrect. He says polar bears typically gave birth to triplets, but now they usually have just one cub. That is wrong.

All research and traditional knowledge shows that triplets, though they do occur, are very infrequent and are by no means typical. Polar bears generally have two cubs — sometimes three and sometimes one. He says the bears' weaning time has risen to 18 months from 12. That is wrong. The weaning period has not changed. Polar bears worldwide have a three-year reproduction cycle, except for one part of Hudson Bay for a period in the mid-1980s when the cycle was shorter.

One polar bear population (western Hudson Bay) has declined since the 1980s and the reproductive success of females in that area seems to have decreased. We are not certain why, but it appears that ecological conditions in the mid-1980s were exceptionally good.

Climate change is having an effect on the west Hudson population of polar bears, but really, there is no need to panic. Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present.

It is noteworthy that the neighbouring population of southern Hudson Bay does not appear to have declined, and another southern population (Davis Strait) may actually be over-abundant.

I understand that people who do not live in the north generally have difficulty grasping the concept of too many polar bears in an area. People who live here have a pretty good grasp of what that is like to have too many polar bears around.

This complexity is why so many people find the truth less entertaining than a good story. It is entirely appropriate to be concerned about climate change, but it is just silly to predict the demise of polar bears in 25 years based on media-assisted hysteria.

Dr. Mitchell Taylor, Polar Bear Biologist,
Department of the Environment, Government of Nunavut, Igloolik, Nunavut

Dr. Mitchell Taylor
Government of Nunavut
Department of Environment - Wildlife Division
PO Box 209
Igloolik, (NU) X0A 0H0
CANADA

Tel: (867) -934-2051
Fax: 867-934-2058
Email: mtaylor2@gov.nu.c

robmaroni said...

Great post Sandra, but don't count on it getting into the classroom or the mainstream media. And don't forget that Al Gore's movie is going to win an Academy Award. That's how much truth matters in America today.

Al said...

rob,

Al Gore is going to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

He will be in good company there with Jew-Killer Yasser Arafart.

Anonymous said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=433170&in_page_id=1770

Al said...

anonymous,

The London Daily Mail photo of the polar bears in the link you provided is photoshopped.

Why do you choose as your "scientific expert" a politician, who got a D and a C in the two science coiurses he took at Harvard?

Sandra said...

Perry orders anti-cancer vaccine for schoolgirls
Houston Chronicle/AP ^ | Feb. 2, 2007 | LIZ AUSTIN PETERSON

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4521884.html

AUSTIN — Gov. Rick Perry ordered today that schoolgirls in Texas must be vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, making Texas the first state to require the shots.

The girls will have to get Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV, that are responsible for most cases of cervical cancer.

Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass laws in state legislatures across the country mandating it Gardasil vaccine for girls as young as 11 or 12. It doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.

Details of the order were not immediately available, but the governor's office confirmed to The Associated Press that he was signing the order and he would comment Friday afternoon.

Perry has several ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, his former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.

Toomey was expected to be able to woo conservative legislators concerned about the requirement stepping on parent's rights and about signaling tacit approval of sexual activity to young girls. Delisi, as head of the House public health committee, which likely would have considered legislation filed by a Democratic member, also would have helped ease conservative opposition.

Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.

It wasn't immediately clear how long the order would last and whether the legislation was still necessary. However it could have been difficult to muster support from lawmakers who champion abstinence education and parents' rights.

Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion rights and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base.

But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different than the one that protects children against polio.

"If there are diseases in our society that are going to cost us large amounts of money, it just makes good economic sense, not to mention the health and well being of these individuals to have those vaccines available," he said.

Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit stating that he or she objected to the vaccine for religious or philosophical reasons.

Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say mandates take away parents' rights to be the primary medical decision maker for their children.

The federal government approved Gardasil in June, and a government advisory panel has recommended that all girls get the shots at 11 and 12, before they are likely to be sexually active.

The New Jersey-based drug company could generate billions in sales if Gardasil — at $360 for the three-shot regimen — were made mandatory across the country. Most insurance companies now cover the vaccine, which has been shown to have no serious side effects.

Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave.

A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government.

Fascismisyourworstenemy said...

Sandra, I have nothing against women in government, but I have a lot against Women in Government. They are as agenda driven as the Naitonal Organization of (Liberal) Women, and anything that they support I run from.

And talk about a conflict of interest. Perry is in the pocket of both Merck and WIG.

"If there are diseases in our society that are going to cost us large amounts of money, it just makes good economic sense, not to mention the health and well being of these individuals to have those vaccines available," he said.

There's an enormous difference between having a vaccine available and requiring young girls to get it.

This whole thing stinks to high heaven and any parent who lets their daughter get this vaccine under this program is out of their mind.

Anonymous said...

Al, I know the polar bear photo is photoshopped. It says so in the article. That's why I gave the link, to show what these ignoramuses would go to to prove their point. Get off your high horse and stop sniping at your allies.

johnsteever said...

One of Women in Government's pet projects is a "Youth Obesity Task Force." Just from the title you should be able to tell how they plan to interfere in your children's lives on this one too. This is just another example of how these people believe they know better than we do and how they will continue to try to interfere with our parental rights until we have none anymore.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for this web log. I only lurk at 6 political sites on the internet and this is one of them. This might be my only time writing here but I will be reading here for a long time to come. You cover interesting topics that aren't covered in a lot of places. God bless you!

SharonGold said...

Sandra, both of your posted articles are sickening, one because it shows how the "news" is continuously manipulated and no how many experts refute what is reported it will still be reported as fact. And two, because the liberals are determined to treat us all like cattle, innoculizing us against diseases we should have a voice about being guinea pigs for. If these innoculations for these young girls becomes law and there isn't an outcry, we're a nation of sheep and the slaughter of our complete freedoms won't be far behind.

Joanie, this essay isn't superficial at all, it's one of your recent best, keep up the good work.

FernBrubacher said...

Even a few of my consevative friends - actually I have some doubts about their conservatism now- have told me that I must see Al Gore's movie, about how convincing it is, and they are having second thought about global warming. I look at these people much differently now.

I'll be reading more of what you have here. It all looks interesting and well reasoned.

Al said...

fern,

Ask your 'conservative' friends [that's a laugh] why they choose as their "scientific expert" a politician who got a D and a C in the two science course he took at Harvard.

Sandra said...

"Al Gore's video has no place in my kids' public school classroom any more than condoms,"

"The film's co-producer, self-described "global warming activist" Laurie David, did not hide her vexation over the decision. "I am shocked that a school district would come to this decision. There is no opposing view to science which is fact,"

Gore's 'Inconvenient' film flops with school district

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES January 12, 2007

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20070112-120719-1638r.htm

Frosty E. Hardison has made things a little chilly for Al Gore: The father of seven had Mr. Gore's global warming film "An Inconvenient Truth" banned from his local public schools.
"Al Gore's video has no place in my kids' public school classroom any more than condoms," Mr. Hardison told The Washington Times yesterday. "It is nothing more than an opportunity for him to grandstand and take more potshots at the Republicans for repeating his own error -- of not doing enough. ... Al Gore is not about finding solutions to the problem. Al Gore is all about getting his party re-elected."
The computer consultant from Federal Way, Wash., became annoyed when he heard the film would be shown in his daughter's school. Joined by other concerned parents, Mr. Hardison delivered a letter to the local school board Tuesday, saying Mr. Gore's film was too politically charged for student viewing.
The board agreed, voting to ban the film unless an "opposing viewpoint" approved by local school superintendent Tom Murphy is offered to students as a counterbalance to the docudrama, which frequently cites the U.S. as a source of environmental woes.
The film's co-producer, self-described "global warming activist" Laurie David, did not hide her vexation over the decision.
"I am shocked that a school district would come to this decision. There is no opposing view to science which is fact, and the facts are clear that global warming is here, now," she said from Los Angeles.
Mr. Hardison and the Federal Way school district, located between Seattle and Tacoma, are not the first to reject Mr. Gore's film. The University of Delaware's Center for Climatic Research and ABC News correspondent John Stossel have said the film pushes alarmist views and questionable information.
In December, the National Science Teachers Association declined Mrs. David's offer to distribute the film for free to 50,000 classrooms; she responded with a Washington Post op-ed accusing the organization of taking donations from Exxon Mobil Corp., Shell and the American Petroleum Institute.
"It's bad enough when a company tries to peddle junk science to a bunch of grown-ups. But, like a tobacco company using cartoons to peddle cigarettes, Exxon Mobil is going after our kids, too," Mrs. David wrote.
The association called her accusations "misleading," noting that oil company contributions amounted to 3 percent of their total donations.
Hollywood-based Participant Productions, which produced "An Inconvenient Truth," "Syriana" and other films with a social message, is distributing Mr. Gore's film free to teachers, with a lesson plan included.
Meanwhile, Mr. Gore remains busy in the youthful marketplace. He announced yesterday that the book version of his film has been adapted for young readers and will be published by Viking Children's Books/Rodale Publishing in April. The book will include 14 new chapters.
"There is no doubt that young people today are more aware of environmental problems than my generation ever was," Mr. Gore said yesterday.
_______________________________

The film's co-producer, self-described "global warming activist" Laurie David,

fits the word DEMAGOGUE perfectly

demagogue noun

An orator who appeals to the passions and prejudices of his audience

A politician who seeks to win and hold office by appeals to mass prejudice.

Demagogues often use lies and distortion.

(See Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin.)

Larry said...

DUNCE AL'S REPORT CARD

C-minus in introductory economics at Harvard

D in once science course at Harvard

C-plus in another science course at Harvard

FIVE F's in five of the eight classes he took at divinity school

Gore did not receive a degree from the divinity school

Gore DID NOT GRADUATE from Vanderbilt Law School


http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/3483.jpg

Sandra said...

Gore to Testify on Climate Change

By: Ryan Grim
February 3, 2007

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2596.html

Former Vice President Al Gore has accepted an invitation to testify next month in a congressional hearing on the highly controversial issue of climate change.

Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth," which focused on global warming, received two Oscar nominations this week, one for best documentary feature. For people who make a parlor game of guessing Gore's intentions for 2008, the appearance will surely stoke speculation that he may yet be a late entrant into the Democratic presidential derby.

Gore will appear at a joint hearing on Wednesday, March 21. He will be the only witness to appear before the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality and the Science and Technology Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. Gore served on both committees during his House tenure representing a Tennessee district.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman John D. Dingell, D-Mich., and Science Committee Chairman Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., will jointly chair the hearing. Climate change has proved a politically thorny issue for newly empowered House Democrats. Dingell, whose district includes many auto industry workers, has been locked in a political battle with Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., over panel jurisdiction on climate change issues.

Anonymous said...

4 teens get probation, house arrest in Long Beach attack

"as the sentencing was underway, one of the victims, Loren Hyman, was undergoing facial reconstruction surgery to repair the multiple fractures in her nose and around her eye from the beatings. "

The decision in the beatings of three white women surprises both sides.

By Joe Mozingo, LA Times Staff Writer February 3, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-lbhate3feb03,1,4907500.story?page=2&coll=la-headlines-pe-california

Nice judicial systemin this country.

jim said...

Gore is the most dangerous kind of stupid person. The kind who doesn't realize how stupid he is and thinks he knows better than anyone else. He's a moron and a liar and came within a hair's breadth of being President.

Larry said...

Jim,

Gore was on the board of the Google at its founding. He was given tens of thousands [or more] of shares of Google stock at the time.

Each share is worth $500 today.

He has enough money to finance his own election campaign without getting any donations from anyone.

And how about this:

http://www.generationim.com/media/pdf-generation-bios.pdf

GENERATION INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT
located in London

Al Gore --- Chairman

David Blood, former chief executive at Goldman Sachs Asset Management --- Managing partner.

Mark Ferguson, former co-head of pan-European research at Goldman Sachs Asset Management --- Chief Operating Officer

Peter Harris, former head of Goldman Sachs International Operations --- Director

Martin Bray, former senior member of Goldman Sachs Portfolio Construction Team --- Director

Lisa Anderson, formerly worked for Goldman Sachs Global Projects --- Director

Frederico Wynne, formerly Financial Sector Analyst for Goldman Sachs --- Director

Phillip Harris, formerly worked for Goldman Sachs Global Operations --- Associate

Peter Knight, former campaign manager to ex-U.S. President Bill Clinton, --- President of Generation Investment Management in the United States.

Sandra said...

johnsteever,sharongold

Vaccine center issues warning
By Gregory Lopes THE WASHINGTON TIMES February 3, 2007

http://washingtontimes.com/business/20070202-100152-9747r.htm

The National Vaccine Information Center yesterday warned state officials to investigate the safety of a breakthrough cancer vaccine as Texas became the first state to make the vaccine mandatory for school-age girls.
Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, are being reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia. The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures.
"Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear to be seizures,
" said Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.
Following federal approval of the vaccine in July 2006, a storm of legislation was introduced across the nation that would make the vaccine mandatory in schools. The District and Virginia are part of a group of at least 17 states considering such legislation. A measure had been introduced in Maryland, but it was shelved last week over concerns about the mandatory language in the bill.
Yesterday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed an order making Texas the first state to require the vaccine. Girls ages 11 and 12 would receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine before entering the sixth grade starting in September 2008.
The American Cancer Society estimates there were 9,710 new cases of cervical cancer in the United States in 2006. The District's cancer control center estimates a total of cervical cancer cases in the city last year, and the American Cancer Society estimates that last year Maryland and Virginia each had 210 cases of cervical center.
Merck began marketing Gardasil last year after the Food and Drug Administration approved it for females ages 9 to 26. The vaccine is the first of its kind to build immunity against two strains of HPV, which lead to 70 percent of cervical cancer cases in the United States.
The vaccine is not effective in men, who can get cancer from other strains of HPV.
Its side effects were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a federal reporting system for consumers to notify federal regulators of bad reactions to medications. The adverse events began being reported in July 2006, when an advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended girls ages 11 and 12 receive the series of shots.
The types of side effects reported are not cause for alarm, according to the American Cancer Society.
"We have not been informed of an instance that would call into question the overall safety of the vaccine," said Debbie Saslow, director of breast and cervical cancer control at the American Cancer Society, adding that about 70 similar events had been known in October 2006.
Likewise, the CDC will not alter its approval of the vaccine despite the number of adverse events revealed through the reporting system.
"A report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System does not necessarily mean the adverse event was serious or that it was caused by the vaccine," said CDC spokesman Curtis Allen. "This vaccine has been tested around the world and has been found to be safe and effective."
Merck is heavily promoting the vaccine through its salespeople imploring doctors to provide it and running TV ads urging young women to get vaccinated so there will be "One Less" cancer patient.
But physicians disagree with public health officials over whether Gardasil is the panacea for cancer. Clayton Young, an obstetrician/gynecologist in Texas, objects to Merck's claim that Gardasil will prevent cervical cancer.
"There is no proof Gardasil will stop cervical cancer," he said. "They haven't been studying it long enough to make that claim."

Merck spokesman Chris Loder said the vaccine is effective for five years and the Whitehouse Station, N.J., drug maker is not sure how long afterward the vaccine will work. Critics point out that an additional booster shot may be necessary.
Advocates for a mandatory vaccine say that although the vaccine does not prevent all causes of cervical cancer, Gardasil is an effective vaccine against the most prevalent cause and therefore is a correct public health measure.
Gardasil is delivered in three separate injections that cost $120 to $150 per injection. Blue Cross Blue Shield, an omnipresent health insurer in the Mid-Atlantic region, covers the vaccine for girls in the federally recommended age groups.
Merck revenue from Gardasil reached $155 million for the fourth quarter of 2006 and $255 million for the entire year.

stonemason said...

Nice bit of research, Sandra. Too bad 99% of the country will never know any of this.

Sandra said...

.
"unmatched experience and leadership on issues of moral imperative"

Al Gore is basking in the global spotlight for nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar

Donna Brazile, Mr. Gore's campaign manager in 2000, told voters recently: "Wait till Oscar night. If Al Gore has slimmed down 25 or 30 pounds, Lord knows,"

Mr. Gore spoke to 1,500 Silicon Valley leaders gathered Friday

Mr. Gore, a member of Apple Computer's board of directors and an adviser to Google, seemed comfortable in the valley, which he called his "second home."

Mr. Gore's talk was held the same day the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a summary of a forthcoming report authored by scientists from more than 100 countries predicting the earth's temperature will rise by 2 to 11 degrees by 2100.

He spoke in a calm, patient voice, telling self-deprecating jokes and chatting about laws of thermodynamics in between jabs at the Bush administration.

Also looming is the expected release of his new book, "The Assault on Reason," which will explore the "damage" he says has been done by the Bush administration.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20070205-124939-2725r.htm

all_good_men said...

Panem et circenses. The liberal elite only want to keep us occupied and dumb so they can control every facit of our lives. Start with the education system and all else will fall into place.

alexib said...

Al Gore couldn't pass a real science or math college course on his best day. He is an intellectual moron whose only expertise is in subjects he decides to declare himself an expert in.

His condescending attitude makes my skin crawl. I can't even listen to the man speak. He is the epitome of an ignorant, uneducated "elitist" who is a leader only in his own mind- and those of the media of course.

Sandra said...

The greatest deception in the history of science : Global Warming:

"the consensus was reached before the research had even begun."

creating unnecessary fear /and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.

any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic,

Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science,

...................................

Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide

By Timothy Ball
Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England-- for 32 years Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg

Monday, February 5, 2007
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and that for 32 years I was a Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.
What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear /and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.

For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?

Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years.

Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.

No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier.

What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.

I once received a three page letter that my lawyer defined as libellous, from an academic colleague, saying I had no right to say what I was saying, especially in public lectures.

Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.

In another instance, I was accused by Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki of being paid by oil companies. That is a lie. Apparently he thinks if the fossil fuel companies pay you have an agenda. So if Greenpeace, Sierra Club or governments pay there is no agenda and only truth and enlightenment?

Personal attacks are difficult and shouldn't occur in a debate in a civilized society. I can only consider them from what they imply. They usually indicate a person or group is losing the debate. In this case, they also indicate how political the entire Global Warming debate has become. Both underline the lack of or even contradictory nature of the evidence.

I am not alone in this journey against the prevalent myth.

Several well-known names have also raised their voices. Michael Crichton, the scientist, writer and filmmaker is one of them. In his latest book, "State of Fear" he takes time to explain, often in surprising detail, the flawed science behind Global Warming and other imagined environmental crises.

Another cry in the wilderness is Richard Lindzen's. He is an atmospheric physicist and a professor of meteorology at MIT, renowned for his research in dynamic meteorology - especially atmospheric waves. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has held positions at the University of Chicago, Harvard University and MIT. Linzen frequently speaks out against the notion that significant Global Warming is caused by humans. Yet nobody seems to listen.

I think it may be because most people don't understand the scientific method which Thomas Kuhn so skilfully and briefly set out in his book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." A scientist makes certain assumptions and then produces a theory which is only as valid as the assumptions. The theory of Global Warming assumes that CO2 is an atmospheric greenhouse gas and as it increases temperatures rise. It was then theorized that since humans were producing more CO2 than before, the temperature would inevitably rise. The theory was accepted before testing had started, and effectively became a law.

As Lindzen said many years ago: "the consensus was reached before the research had even begun." Now, any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic, when in fact they are simply being good scientists. This has reached frightening levels with these scientists now being called climate change denier with all the holocaust connotations of that word. The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted.

Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet.

Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.

Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information.

I was greatly influenced several years ago by Aaron Wildavsky's book "Yes, but is it true?"
The author taught political science at a New York University and realized how science was being influenced by and apparently misused by politics. He gave his graduate students an assignment to pursue the science behind a policy generated by a highly publicised environmental concern. To his and their surprise they found there was little scientific evidence, consensus and justification for the policy. You only realize the extent to which Wildavsky's findings occur when you ask the question he posed. Wildavsky's students did it in the safety of academia and with the excuse that it was an assignment. I have learned it is a difficult question to ask in the real world, however I firmly believe it is the most important question to ask if we are to advance in the right direction.
..................................
Dr. Tim Ball, Chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (www.nrsp.com), is a Victoria-based environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. He can be reached at letters@canadafreepress.com

Sandra said...

Governor Plans to Fire Oregon Climatologist for Skeptical View on Global Warming

Global warming debate spurs Ore. title tiff

February 7, 2007 By VINCE PATTON, KGW Staff

http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_020607_news_taylor_title.59f5d04a.html

In the face of evidence agreed upon by hundreds of climate scientists, George Taylor holds firm. He does not believe human activities are the main cause of global climate change.

Taylor also holds a unique title: State Climatologist.

Hundreds of scientists last Friday issued the strongest warning yet on global warming saying humans are "very likely" the cause.

“Most of the climate changes we have seen up until now have been a result of natural variations,” Taylor asserts.

His opinions conflict not only with many other scientists, but with the state of Oregon's policies.

So the governor wants to take that title from Taylor and make it a position that he would appoint.

In an exclusive interview with KGW-TV, Governor Ted Kulongoski confirmed he wants to take that title from Taylor. The governor said Taylor's contradictions interfere with the state's stated goals to reduce greenhouse gases, the accepted cause of global warming in the eyes of a vast majority of scientists.

“He is Oregon State University's climatologist. He is not the state of Oregon's climatologist,” Kulongoski said.

Taylor declined to comment on the proposal other than to say he was a "bit shocked" by the news. He recently engaged in a debate at O.M.S.I. and repeated his doubts about accepted science.

In an interview he told KGW, "There are a lot of people saying the bulk of the warming of the last 50 years is due to human activities and I don't believe that's true." He believes natural cycles explain most of the changes the earth has seen.

A bill will be introduced in Salem soon on the matter.

Sen. Brad Avakian, (D) Washington County, is sponsoring the bill. He said global warming is so important to state policy it's important to have a climatologist as a consultant to the governor. He denied this is targeted personally at Taylor. "Absolutely not," Avakian said, "I've never met Mr. Taylor and if he's got opinions I hope he comes to the hearing and testifies."

Kulongoski said the state needs a consistent message on reducing greenhouse gases to combat climate change.

The Governor says, "I just think there has to be somebody that says, 'this is the state position on this.'"

(KGW Reporter Vince Patton contributed to this report)

DaveBurkett said...

Governor Plans to Fire Oregon Climatologist for Skeptical View on Global Warming

The ruse continues, and those who want to stand up for the truth are getting the axe more and more frequently.

Anonymous said...

Gore told his audience that global warming was causing record cold.

"The extreme conditions are actually the end result of the planet warming," Gore claimed.



http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2007/20070207122211.aspx

Anonymous said...

This site is full of all of the whinning, crying, conspiracy theories you find on any lunatic fringe right wing site. Stick a sock in it. You'll be out of power in 2 short years.

robmaroni said...

You can come back here and criticize only after you learn to spell. Bwahahahahaha

Jerk.

Sandra said...

Hey, "anonymous"

How's your "global warming" doing?

Snow Squalls Bury Upstate New York

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070208/D8N5L6300.html

Feb 8, 2007

(AP) Sub-zero temperatures and wind chill advisories greet Minnesotans for the seventh day in a row

OSWEGO, N.Y. (AP) - While the northern Plains and Northeast shiver in dangerously cold temperatures, the folks in upstate New York are keeping warm shoveling snow - lots of snow.

Since Sunday, the small towns of Parish and Mexico have recorded more than 6 feet of snow, and forecasters with the National Weather Service say it isn't over yet.

Another 2 feet or more of heavy lake effect snow was expected Thursday for the communities along eastern Lake Ontario, and more squalls are likely through the weekend.

"We're just trying to keep up. It's almost an unreal amount," said Mayor Randy Bateman of Oswego, where 70 inches of snow had fallen by Thursday morning. "We catch up when it stops, but then it just comes again, even heavier."

Whiteout conditions - the snow has been falling at a rate of 5 inches an hour at times - forced state police to temporarily close Interstate 81 between Central Square and Pulaski, a stretch of about 15 miles. Travel advisories against unnecessary travel were posted for Oswego and its neighboring counties. Mexico officials renewed a snow emergency declaration, and many government offices were closed.

Schools were closed for a fourth day in Oswego and Mexico.

In West Virginia, where as much as 9 inches of snow has fallen, some schools that had been closed were able to reopen on Thursday, but in most of the state, classes were still delayed, and in a few counties, canceled. Officials had to call snowplow drivers out of retirement Wednesday to clear the roads.

The weather also disrupted travelers, leaving some stranded overnight in airports in the Midwest after flights to the Northeast were disrupted.

Temperatures in the Northeast were inching back up to something closer to normal for this time of year, but the upper Midwest and northern Plains still awoke to subzero temperatures Thursday - minus-12 in Minneapolis and 3 below zero in Chicago.

The bitter cold and slippery roads have contributed to at least 19 deaths - five in Ohio, four in Illinois, four in Indiana, two in Kentucky, two in Michigan, and one each in Wisconsin, New York and Maryland, authorities said. Three of them died Tuesday when two SUVs crashed on a slick road in northern Indiana. An autopsy Wednesday determined that an elderly woman found in a New York City building had died of hypothermia.

In Oswego, a big concern was keeping the city's 800 fire hydrants clear, said Fire Chief Ed Geers.

"We're just trying to keep on top of digging out the hydrants. When you get 5 feet of snow in 24 hours, it's tough," Geers said.

Al said...

Anonymous,

I hope they give you a heater as you post from the basement of MOVEon.org.

Otherwise you might freeze your a** off.

Sandra said...

Mandating Gardasil -- A Gross Infringement on Parental Rights

Contact: Children of God for Life, 877-488-LIFE, info@cogforlife.org

http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/57127618.html

MURFREESBORO, Tenn., Feb. 9 /Standard Newswire/ -- Children of God for Life is urging West Virginia lawmakers to scrap HB 2835 mandating Merck's new Gardasil HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine.

Following last week' hotly debated Executive Order by Governor Perry to mandate Gardasil in Texas, West Virginia is the latest of at least two dozen states proposing to add the controversial vaccine as a requirement for school attendance. However, unlike Texas and 48 other states including DC, which have laws allowing parents to opt-out, WVA and Mississippi are the only two States that do not provide religious or philosophical exemptions for vaccines.

"It is utterly disgraceful that WVA would force this vaccine on families, especially when their State law provides no relief to those who object to other vaccines," stated Children of God for Life Executive Director, Debi Vinnedge. "Even if they include an opt-out for Gardasil, such a move would be unconstitutional for parents who have religious objections to other vaccines, such as those using aborted fetal cell lines."

While Gardasil does not utilize aborted fetal cell lines – a primary focus of Children of God for Life, the group noted it raises other moral concerns. And they are not alone. Since Perry's actions last week, numerous family and medical groups agree that this is a family decision for the parents – not the State.

In a statement released Jan 22, the American College of Pediatrics noted that mandating Gardasil for school attendance "is a serious, precedent-setting action" replacing parental medical decision making with government regulations.

Likewise, Focus on the Family warned last year, that state officials, not parents, would become the primary sexual-health decision makers for America's children.

Vinnedge noted, "Mandating Gardasil is like the State mandating condoms for children. And neither one is effective at preventing cervical cancer. The HPV virus's incubation period is 20 years, yet this vaccine was tested for only 4 years. No one knows whether this will prevent cervical cancer at all."

Last year the Associated Press reported the FDA warning that, "any advantage the vaccine provides in protecting against the four virus types could be offset by infection by any of the multiple [over 100] other types of HPV that the vaccine does not cover." The FDA further noted that "the vaccine may lead to an increased number of cases of a cancer precursor among patients already infected by any of the four virus types at the time they receive the vaccine, and whose immune systems have not cleared the virus from their bodies."

"West Virginia is already a quagmire of contention in their antiquated State regulations on vaccines," noted Vinnedge. "If they intend to mandate Gardasil, they must provide an opt-out clause and add religious exemptions for other vaccines as well. Anything less would be a gross infringement on parental rights."

For more information, visit www.cogforlife.org/gardasil.htm

Sandra said...

BOSTON GLOBE's Ellen Goodman: Global warming deniers are like Holocaust deniers...

excerpt:

I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.

No change in political climate
By Ellen Goodman | February 9, 2007

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/09/no_change_in_political_climate/

Ellen Goodman's e-mail address is goodman@globe.com.

Larryt said...

New York Guard Prepares to Respond to Upstate Snow Emergency

American Forces Press Service ^ | Gerry Gilmore

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9, 2007 – The New York National Guard is preparing to assist local communities stricken by a winter storm that has dumped as much as 10 feet of snow in some areas, a state National Guard spokesman said today.

Larry said...

Ice Age ‘07: Politically Incorrect Weather
CBN News ^ | February 9, 2007 | Dale Hurd
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/102220.aspx
Someone apparently forgot to get the memo to winter about the imminent threat from “global warming.” This story says some areas of New York State have received 100 inches of snow since last Sunday and could get 4 more feet, yes feet, next week.

Oh, pardon my ignorance. Global warming, portrayed by internet inventor Al Gore and some really smart people at the UN as the biggest crisis in world history, is now about climate change. So it can get really cold, and that also means it’s warming. And if you don’t understand that logic, you probably didn’t go to the right school.

Oh, and today the Boston Globe’s Ellen Goodman compared global warming deniers to holocaust deniers. Nice. When do the show trials begin?

Remember those photos of poor polar bears supposedly marooned on melting icebergs? Did you also see the photos of the Swedish reindeer? You didn’t? The ones starving in Sweden because the ice on the ground is too thick this winter? Now, there’s an inconvenient truth.

Well, do you remember this past hurricane season? No? That’s because there were very few hurricanes of any note. The climate change prophets of doom in 2006 predicted the meteorological equivalent of a disaster epic, with cyclonic monsters out for revenge because of all the damage your SUV did to the planet. Oops. Another no-show by nature. I live a few miles from the ocean in Virginia Beach and I cannot remember a calmer hurricane season.

Hmmm…the weather is obviously not politically correct, even if The Weather Channel now is.

The city of Chicago was once buried under an ice sheet that was one mile thick.

Want to the earth to cool? Be careful what you wish for.

Sandra said...

MERCK is spreading the money around

Pol has plan to nix cervical cancer
NY DAILY NEWS ^ | February 9th, 2007 | JORDAN LITE

http://www.nydailynews.com/02-09-2007/news/v-pfriendly/story/495996p-417953c.html


Schoolgirls in New York would have to get shots against a cancer-causing virus under a bill an assemblywoman will introduce next week, the Daily News has learned.

Assemblywoman Amy Paulin (D-Scarsdale) will introduce legislation mandating girls be inoculated with the three-shot series against human papilloma virus, a sexually transmitted disease that causes 70% of cervical cancers. Children whose parents have religious objections to the vaccine, called Gardasil, would be exempt.

"This is a revolutionary opportunity to eradicate a disease that kills many, many women. As a mom, I'm grateful my daughter will not have to fear having cervical cancer," said Paulin, whose 18-year-old daughter just received her first shot.

A companion bill is expected in the Senate.

It would be up to the state health department to decide who should receive the vaccine. Federal guidelines recommend it for 11- and 12-year-old girls - before they become sexually active - but those as young as 9 and women up to age 26 can get immunizations to protect themselves.

Gov. Spitzer has allotted $5 million in his budget to buy the $360 series for low-income women and those without insurance. Right now, some doctors aren't stocking it because insurers aren't reimbursing them for the entire cost.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry issued an executive order last Friday that girls there get the shots, and at least 17 other states are debating similar requirements.

Some religious conservatives and others say it should be up to parents to decide whether to vaccinate their daughters.

Some 10,000 U.S. women are diagnosed with cervical cancer each year and 4,000 die of it.

proudpodunknative said...

Sandra, this government Gardasil deal is pure fascism. Children have to be inoculated for childhood diseases like measles and mumps before they go to school mainly because those diseases are spread through contact. So that kind of mandatory immunization is understandable. This immunization against cervical cancer is pure medical tyranny and just one small example of how we're headed toward nationalized healthcare, especially if Hillary wins in 2008.

Anonymous said...

What a right wing conspiracy theory propaganda machine you have here! I'm glad to see you all posting here because other wise you would be out among normal people who aren't looking for a boogie man behind every bush!

Sandra said...

President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity

Drudge Report ^ | 2/12/2007 |

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.

In an interview with "Hospodárské noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?•

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.• This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.•

Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...•

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?•

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrically opposite.• Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.• Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.•

Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal?•

A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it's obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism.•

Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...•

A: ...I am right...•

Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself?•

A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?•

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.• It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected incomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.• That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.

[English translation from Harvard Professor Lubos Motl]

Sandra said...

Global Warming Turns Ugly

New York Sun Editorial February 12, 2007

http://www.nysun.com/article/48447

The debate over global warming has turned hysterical in the wake of the Democratic takeover of Congress and the most recent United Nations report asserting a 90% likelihood of human-caused climate change. And anybody who disagrees had better be prepared for attacks on their scientific credentials, their honesty, and even their right to speak out.

Case in point — the singularly nasty attack by the left-wing Guardian newspaper of England a week or so ago attacking a distinguished American think tank, the American Enterprise Institute of Washington, D.C., for soliciting scholarly papers that might disagree with the so-called global warming consensus. "Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study," the Guardian breathlessly headlined its story last week.

AEI, described as a "lobby group," was said to be offering $10,000 — plus, wait for it, travel expenses — to scientists and economists for essays that showed the "limitations of global climate models." In the second paragraph the Guardian described AEI as an "ExxonMobil-funded think tank with close links to the Bush administration."

Never mind that scientists on both sides of the issue take "cash" to study global warming. And never mind that AEI isn't a "lobby group" — under American tax law, organizations like AEI are expressly prohibited from lobbying. Or that ExxonMobil funding is less than 1% of AEI's total budget, or that a recent AEI research paper called for a tax on carbon, an idea that is hardly in line with ExxonMobil's financial interests.

When the left is out to smear an opponent, any brand of tar will do. Consider Vice President Gore's mantra, which has been picked up by much of the press, that global warming skeptics are "deniers" — as in Holocaust deniers. You might expect that liberals would be leery of attempts to liken an opponent to the nuts who deny that Hitler murdered 6 million Jews. "Are you now or have you ever been a denier?" But no, the moral paragons of Beverly Hills appear set to deliver an Oscar to Mr. Gore for his bravery in telling supposedly inconvenient truths.

Mr. Gore has been caught at this sort of thing before. In 1994, Ted Koppel disclosed on "Nightline" that Mr. Gore had called to suggest he investigate various global warming skeptics for their ties to the coal industry and other interests. Mr. Koppel said he had refused. He went on to chastise Mr. Gore publicly for "resorting to political means to achieve what should ultimately be resolved on a purely scientific basis."

Just so. But Mr. Gore and others still seem unable to restrain their bile. The Washington Post recently quoted Mr. Gore as referring to a prominent Republican senator as a "denier." All of which makes one wonder: Do these people have as much confidence as they pretend to have in their theories about why the globe may be heating up? Maybe there is good reason for AEI and others to ask for a closer look at those computer models claiming to show a meltdown of the earth in coming decades.

The late Karl Popper, one of the 20th century's most eminent philosophers, wrote and spoke often of the glories — and dangers — of the Enlightenment's faith in science. " … the theory that truth is manifest not only breeds fanatics — men possessed by the conviction that all those who do not see the manifest truth must be possessed by the devil — but it may also lead … to authoritarianism."

You may think that's overwrought. But remember that just last week on February 9, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared that government would have to impose a mandatory cap to reduce greenhouse emissions by 50%, a move that would bring government ever more deeply into the heart of the economy. And that, global warming enthusiasts add, would just be a first step. For, after all, it is the point of the whole global warming agitation to begin with.

DaveBurkett said...

Sandra, thanks for the info. As soon as I can sell my house I'm packing my bags and moving to the Czech Republic. {G}

Anonymous said...

Vaclav Klaus has the environmentalists' number. He better watch his back.

smithy said...

U.S. House lawmakers canceled a morning subcommittee meeting on global warming as the mammoth snowstorm that has caused chaos across the Midwest headed east. The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing entitled "Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?" will be rescheduled at a later time, the committee announced.

Al said...

Smithy,

Funniest thing I ever saw.

U.S. House lawmakers canceled a morning subcommittee meeting on global warming as the mammoth snowstorm that has caused chaos across the Midwest headed east.

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing entitled "Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?" will be rescheduled at a later time, the committee announced.