Monday, April 9, 2007

Global Warming Questions

Given the quantity and quality of scientists who say global warming is happening, and the shrinking voices of those who say it is not, I tend to believe that global warming is in fact happening. There is some contention, however, as to whether it is caused by human activity. There is a strong correlation between the rise in the levels of man-made CO2, and the rise in temperatures which heavily implicates human activity, but a correlation is not proof. This is where the global warming deniers step in. they say that the increase in solar radiation over the past few years is responsible for the warming, and that the rise in temperature is causing the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere rather than the other way around, or that there is some other reason for the correlation. I personally find this to be far fetched, because if the rise in CO2 is a result of higher temperatures, then you have to have to believe that the majority of the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere is not the result of human activity. If that's the case what else could have caused this? The deniers like to point out that more CO2 comes from volcano explosions than from industry, but have there really been that many more volcanic activity in the last 150 years that would explain why the levels of CO2 are so much higher than they were over the previous centuries?

We know that more greenhouse gases theoretically causes an increase in temperature. We know that human being have been producing a lot of greenhouse gases.

Is it really all that far fetched to believe that humans are causing this increase in temperature?

That being said, I think some of the things that environmentalists are saying are a little far fetched. Some would like you to think that this spells the end of life on Earth, or for the more restrained ones, the end of civilization. Now, come on. Sure, with all of the areas that would be flooded it would create a huge refuge problem that would cause severe worldwide economic problems, but would that really result in the collapse of civilization? And would the effects of global warming accumulate so quickly that we couldn't adjust to the changes in time?

Saturday, April 7, 2007

Which Is the Real Culture of Death?

Christians like to say that those who support abortion, euthanasia, and physician assisted suicide are celebrating a "Culture of Death." They conveniently leave out people who are in favor of the death penalty, of course (with the exception of Pope JPII, at least he was consistent.)

But given that Christians believe that we should all sacrifice the pleasures of this life for access to heaven in the hereafter, are they really pro-life? They tell us to forgo the pleasures of the flesh, and that we have to do in this life what some deity tells us to, so we will be rewarded when we die. The whole idea that there is any form of existence superior to life, necessarily devalues life. Those in favor of abortion, euthanasia and suicide, however, hold life to such a high value that they won't allow it to be tarnished and desecrated by unwanted pregnancy and terminal illness. They revel in all the pleasures that this life offers and hold them far higher, than the promise of any reward that may be granted in death.

It is those who fantasize about an afterlife superior to real life that are truly celebrating a culture of death.

Media Puppets

Looks like the "confessions" that he sailors gave were more conditional statements edited to look like confessions.

According to the Daily Mail,

"Lt Carman said: 'At no time did we apologise.' He said that they always qualified their statements when interviewed, saying things like 'according to the information you have presented to us'. It appears these qualifiers were edited out of the versions broadcast."

Still, even qualified statements like that came far too easily from these guys.

Friday, April 6, 2007

Finally, a Rational Strategy

Any competent analyst can see that violence against Muslims, even against terrorists is the best way to help them recruit more terrorists. In too many cases, using violence against terrorists has proven to be like trying to kill weeds with fertilizer. It worked against Al Qaida in Afghanistan, although not so well against the Taliban, but in Iraq Operation Iraqi Freedom has been a more effective Al Qaida recruiting tool than anything they could come up with themselves.

So what should be done against terrorists? A story in today's New York Times tells us about Dutch soldiers taking a much smarter approach. A lot of the Taliban's power comes from the fact that many people are still dependant upon them, so the Dutch are focusing on building infrastructure and giving people an alternative.

In their own words, “We’re not here to fight the Taliban... We’re here to make the Taliban irrelevant.”

Also from the NYT article,

"Dutch officers also say the approach has yielded promising results here. Sometimes villagers have warned them of ambushes or roadside bombs, and in several villages the Dutch are rarely attacked. Since the task force began operations last August, it has not suffered a combat fatality."

A Recant at Last

The freed British sailors are now saying that they were well inside Iraqi waters and that they only confessed because they were told that if they didn't they would face seven years in Iranian prison.

Maybe the guys on the right about the behaviour of these sailors. They confessed when threatened merely with seven years in prison. No torture, not even a death threat. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and kept my mind open that they were telling the truth when they confessed, but now it's clear that these guys are clearly just a bunch of pussies.

They're Home and No Recant Yet

According to this article the hostages, although now home and safe from Iranian intimidation and torture, are not recanting their confessions.

They're practically saying that they had a great time.

"I would not say anything different to here and I will be completely truthful. I will definitely promote Iran actually, there is a lot of ignorance in the UK about Iran and the people."

"We had had a very pleasant stay under the conditions we were in. Obviously we were not tourists. All the treatment has been fantastic towards us and there is no bad feeling at all towards Iran."

Still waiting for a response from Tony.