GeologicalScienceBlog - subjects include Geology, Climatology, Environmental Science, NASCAR, Beer, Property Rights, Random Thoughts, & Politics from a Christian Conservative/Libertarian/pragmatist viewpoint. As a Dad & Grandad, I am concerned about the overgrowth of government at the expense of freedom. Background - two degrees in Geology (BS '77, MS '90), started studying Geology beginning Senior Year of high school (1971 - 1972) <68>

Monday, April 29, 2013

Still Here

Been busy with life.

Posting this Pat Condell video, perhaps to post to Facebook later. Back later...
Posted by: on-the-rocks / 5:23 AM 0 comments
|

Saturday, January 26, 2013

Not Ready for Facebook


“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” ~ William F. Buckley, Jr.

I am just "parking" this here, in case I decide to post it on Facebook.  I have to maintain some sort of relationship with cousins, etc..



Labels:

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 9:35 PM 1 comments
|

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Oh, By the Way, Happy New Year

As we now have wireless internet (though sometimes off and on) in the basement apartment (aka "the bunker"), I will try to blog some more.  Promises, promises, I know.

With my climate diatribe, I noticed that I was at 2199 posts, so I decided to go ahead and push it to 2200.

So there.
Posted by: on-the-rocks / 8:00 AM 0 comments
|

Another Climate Change Rant

As long as there has been an atmosphere, there has been climate change. Nothing new here.


It is possible that we affect the global climate, but as nature is an "open system" - with at least 22 different climate drivers - it is impossible to assess how much is "our fault".

From the website of H. Leighton Steward:
There are things other than combustion-related carbon dioxide, e.g., changes in land use patterns, such as deforestation (especially in the tropics) and the growth of "urban heat islands", that might affect global weather and climate, but other than on a very local scale, accurate assessments of human contributions may never be possible.

Of these 22 (+/-) climate drivers, some are cyclical, some are random. Some enhance each other (synergy) and some "cancel each other out" (antagonism). Some trigger Positive Feedback Loops, others trigger Negative Feedback Loops. Some are influenced by humans, some are totally natural.

As for the climate driver that gets most of the "blame" - carbon dioxide - it only comprises about 388 ppm of the troposphere (lowest layer of the atmosphere). That is about 4 parts out of every 10,000 (0.038%). And anthropogenic carbon dioxide (mostly from fuel combustion) is dwarfed by natural sources, e.g., volcanoes, hot springs, ocean emissions, animal/bacterial respiration.

Water vapor and clouds are responsible for the lion's share of the Greenhouse Effect, but this fact is too often ignored by those with "an agenda".

Sadly, for 30+ years, this subject has been politicized for the purpose of the concentration of power and money by those associated with the UN. All of this "Sustainability" stuff is largely driven by the overarching desire to control people and their activities.

And it is truly sad that too many Geologists associated with government or academia are caught up in the mantra. And some of these Geologists - that consider themselves to be "independent thinkers" - will allow no dissenting views to be considered.  I have Geologist "friends" that will no longer talk to me and I am most likely excluded from geo-blogging events (or at best barely tolerated) - for my skeptical views.

Bottom line - The Sun is the major controller of the Earth's temperatures and all things related and Water Vapor and Clouds control most of the Greenhouse Effect.

On a side note: My skepticism does not negate my environmental concerns. I recycle - because it makes sense. For 35+ years I have recycled aluminum and other things. Conservation of resources makes sense. Proper disposal of waste just makes sense. Blaming every unusual event on "climate change" does not.

Labels: , ,

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 7:51 AM 0 comments
|

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Hoplophobia - the New Word for the Day

It goes without saying that the events in Newtown, CT are horrible and there has to be some sort of effort to head off future mass shootings.  One short-term consideration is arming teachers.  Will return to that another time, though.  In the meantime, an important clarification.

Haplophobia is the irrational fear of weapons, specifically guns.

Here is a useful link.  Hoplophobia

I am sure that pointing this out to individual Hoplophobes will cause some consternation on their part (and a bit of glee on yours).

Here is a useful passage from the link above.

"The opponents of gun rights come in four fundamental categories:

Utopian Idealists - Dreamers willing to ignore human nature (anger, hostility, temper, greed, lust, hunger, poverty, want, megalomania, social pathologies, etc.) in the vain hope for a world where no one ever needs to defend themselves or others; Result: misguided efforts to disarm the public since no one should ever be capable of exerting lethal force for any reason. Fairly rare.

Routine Bigots - Ignorant gun haters who, generally, have never actually seen a real gun much less fired one, and hate what they don’t know; strong corollaries with race haters; Result: Vigorous anti-rights profile if left alone, however they often resolve their blind hatred when education removes the ignorance -- frequent anecdotes of such folks “converting” after their first time at a range. Quite common.

Hoplophobes -- Unfortunate souls afflicted with a phobic terror of firearms, deserving of pity, and in need of medical attention; Result: Though they should never be involved in setting policy on self defense, national security, or Second Amendment rights, they often insinuate [sic] themselves into such positions, their need for treatment goes unattended, and they cause grevious social harm. Easily mistaken for plain bigots. Too common.

Power Mongers - Like some at the U.N or many anti-gun-rights politicians, they know full well that an armed public interferes with their plans, and they insidiously use lies about the gun issue, and “disarmament (of you but not them) as a road to peace” as a power base and source of support; Result: truly evil, tyrannts [sic] who ultimately suppress human rights, contribute to global genocides, live an elite lifestyle, care not for their fellow citizens. Rare but extremely dangerous.

[A little side rant - I think the terms "gun rights" and "gun lobby" are misnomers, as guns are inanimate objects.  I think the better term would be "self-defense rights" and "self-defense lobby".]

[Another side rant - "...they often insinuate themselves into such positions..."  I think the proper word is "insert".]

Don't want to "overcook it" on the first day back...Later ya'll.

Labels: , , , ,

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 5:53 AM 0 comments
|

Still Here,...

There are a plethora of reasons why I haven't been blogging.

The primary reason is - for the most part - I have largely been restricted by circumstances to using a small netbook computer for internet activities and it is a hassle.  I have asked several friends - and received affirmative responses - about the issue of cursor oversensitivity on laptops, i.e., simply moving the cursor over link activates the link.  The computer was purchased for a working vacation three years ago and it served it purpose.  It is just a hassle for daily use.

Another issue is that because of changes in living circumstances, we now live in a basement apartment and pay rent to a family member.  More details another time.  Anyway, we have wireless but for some reason, our desktop - when connected - seems to interfere with the internet and phone of the upstairs, so I am relegated to using it during odd times.

So, will try to blog when access allows.  And when the spirit moves me.

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 5:26 AM 0 comments
|

Monday, July 16, 2012

Observance

"I usually try to keep my sadness pent up inside, where it can fester quietly as a mental illness."

Author unknown

Labels: ,

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 6:40 AM 1 comments
|

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Tiny Lund, a NASCAR Legend


Tiny Lund was a "Hoss Cartwright" sort of character, he was 6 feet, 6 inches tall and weighed 300+ pounds and was the source of many stories and legends.

One story was that he walked into the garage of a Ford dealer (in SC?) and spied a V-8 engine on the floor of the garage, after looking it over, he asked the shop foreman "If I can pick up that engine, can I have it?" The foreman - not knowing whom he was dealing with - said "Yeah, sure." Tiny walked over to the engine, squatted down, wrapped his arms around the engine, stood up and walked past the incredulous foreman. He carried the engine to the back of his pickup truck, placed it there, closed the tailgate, and then drove away (presumably waving "Thanks"). [Being a good-hearted person, it is possible that he went back later and paid for the engine.]

Sadly, he was killed in a crash at Talladega in August, 1975. The last race he won was a short-track race in Summerville, SC., the Thursday night before the Talladega race. After winning the race, he spent about 2 hours loading up his race car with children and slowly driving them around the race track - while everyone else was leaving.

I was fortunate to see him win a NASCAR Grand American race - driving a Mercury Cougar - at Jefferson, GA (now Gresham Motorsports Park) in 1968.


If you read the article, there is another story regarding off-track pranks between Tiny and Cale Yarborough.  It was either a payback for Cale's prank (or it might have led to Cale's prank).  I may add it later.

Labels:

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 9:33 AM 0 comments
|

Wednesday, May 09, 2012

A Few Debate Tactics for Conservatives/Libertarians

[Disclaimer:  I have never had any sort of debate training.  I have simply observed conversations and engaged in logical thought as to what was effective and what wasn't. 

I often practice class lectures on various subjects, so as to be prepared. Likewise, it doesn't hurt to engage in debate practice-sessions before the fact, wherein you imagine yourself in a one-on-one debate, whether in person or on Facebook. 

If this imagined debate is with a longitme "Modern Liberal" friend or relative, maintaining decorum and civility is paramount in order to; 1) Maintain some sort of good relations with this person; and 2) Prevail in your "argument(s)".  If this polite back-and-forth occurs "in public" on Facebook, you always need to remember that there are likely "fence-riders" on various subjects - awaiting more information before forming their own opinions.  If you firmly - but politely - articulate your logical viewpoints, you may convince them, though you may never know.  [For every Liberal that bitches about "politics on Facebook", 3 or 4 people tell me privately that they like what I write and to "keep it up".] 

As for your "prevailing", you don't want to deliver a public "beatdown" of someone about which you care.  As people don't like to lose face in public, you shouldn't seek to publicly crush their arguments and then expect a "white flag". 

[I would suggest reading up on Dale Carnegie to offset their Saul Alinsky.  Someone has to maintain the "moral high ground".]

You want to "send them home" with some well-articulated philosophical concepts for them to mull-over on their own time.  It may take time for new thoughts and understandings to "bloom".  It may take weeks, it may take months, or progress may never be evident to your observation.  From time to time, you might inquire as to whether or not they have any questions regarding the discussion - just to "feel them out". 

I don't like the Liberal "pop psychology" concept of "confronting someone about..." with a full-frontal assault.  Rather I would prefer to "speak with them" and look for ways to disarm them, i.e., to keep them off guard, not for any sort of ego-driven "victory", but to subtlely and gradually prevail.  Being firm - while non-confrontational - is one good strategy.  If you have evolved "out" of "Liberalism", you might suggest that you "used to feel that way" about a certain issue or issues.

Be willing to acknowledge points of mutual agreement or ambivalence (or evolving opinions) - but limit the number of issues-to-be-addressed and politely resist their attempts at "bait and switch", if they become uneasy at the intellectual weakness of their arguments.  Assure them that "we can talk about that another time". 

As for posing your viewpoints - this is where practice is important - pose them as questions, as is done in words attributed to Jesus in the New Testament when he addressed his accusers.  By honestly asking questions, you appear less confrontational and you force your "opponent" to examine and articulate the source of his/her beliefs.  Don't do it in a "rapid-fire" manner, you are not seeking to overwhelm your "opponent", but to - as stated - "send them home" with food for thought.  Give and take.

Choose your battles carefully, seek common ground, remain calm and confident, admit uncertainty and in-progress thinking, keep your powder dry, and don't say everything you are thinking.  [Forgive the cliches.]   And humbly admit (to yourself) that you are not 100% right and they are not 100% wrong.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by: on-the-rocks / 12:13 PM 0 comments
|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?