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>

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Thursday Videos - On a More Serious Note...

leaving aside the "bread and circuses"...

A reminder of what we are up against from the "religion of peace", from FrontPageMag and David Horowitz TV:



The next video is a long one, introducing the European film "Fitna":



Despite the lies of the leftist media and their cohorts, the Islamist War on the West is bigger than Al Qaida and 9/11 was just a single battle, that we lost. If we don't continue to show resolve and a willingness to kick ass, more Americans (and other westerners) will die.

If the UN and their Leftist cohorts have their way, we will not even be able to talk about this subject. Despite their protestations, it is not an indictment of peaceful Muslims, it is against those that would exterminate or subjugate all that disagree with them.

Being nice to bad people will not make them nice.

Labels: , , , ,

|

Thursday Videos - More NASCAR action

After being involved in an earlier big wreck (note the body damage), apparently Kurt Busch cuts a left front tire and though his technique was somewhat different from Michael Waltrip's earlier save, the result is the same, thankfully.

From YouTube user Alex3003:



If you go to YouTube, you can catch highlights of the wild finish.

Labels: , ,

|

Thursday Videos - NASCAR action from Talladega...

last Sunday.

Though Michael Waltrip inadvertently cut across the front end of his teammate, he was able to keep the car from smashing into the inside wall, twice.

From YouTube user Alex3003:



In another incident, Kurt Busch made a similar save.

Labels: , ,

|

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Tuesday Videos - Using Air Force One for Aerial Photography...

Yeah, that makes sense, especially around New York City.



This particular video is from YouTube user faavradmin.

Being busy with my full-time job, a family funeral, and my afternoon/evening classes yesterday, I wasn't aware of this story. Being busy with my full-time online job today, I haven't had the radio on, so I haven't heard commentary on this issue, so I am just going on past experience.

If this had happened during the Bush Administration, I don't have to tell you of the spittle-spray coming from Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, et al, demanding the President resign over such idiocy (or at least being brought up on charges). The Democrat/MSM talkingheads would be in full agreement with the DNC talking points on this one.

Are they giving the "messiah" a pass on this one?

Labels: , , , ,

|

Tuesday Videos - Showing Where Allegiances Are

Aside from the issue of criminalizing thoughts, a glaring problem with "hate crimes" legislation is that it never is applied equally across-the-board, i.e., there are always those that are favored and those that are disfavored.

To get a view of this, watch this YouTube video, from CapitolHillWatch:



While I am sure that vets do not want to be seen as "victims", this illustrates the absurdity of "liberal thought". Some groups are more equal than others in their eyes.

In the original Moonbattery post, another Republican rep offered an amendment to exempt convicted pedophiles from "hate crimes protection", but the amendment was bravely defeated by Democrats in the committee, thereby offering protection for an important Democrat constituency - convicted pedophiles. If this travesty passes, "hate crimes" against convicted pedophiles may include expressing an opinion on the radio or in print against those that should not even be out of prison.

Another reminder about "hate speech" as included in such "legislation" - it is not an objective measure that determines what is a chargeable offense, but the opinion of the aggrieved party, making it tailor-made for "activists" with a chip-on-their-shoulder against anyone they feel inferior to. Rather than deal with their own issues or try to conform to societal or biological norms, they have to try to destroy those norms.

Labels: , , , ,

|

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Tuesday Videos - on Wednesday...

'cause I was too busy yesterday and this is too good to wait until tomorrow.

A friend sent this link. You got to watch this - it is amazing. Talk about not judging a book by its cover!

The embedding is disabled, so you will have to follow this link.

Enjoy!

Labels: , , ,

|

Thursday, April 09, 2009

A New Word for the Day

(From a FrontPageMag column):

Theaplegia -

..."the inability to envisage a scene or a prospect, or to actually view the subject of one’s discourse. It is an infirmity peculiar to the supra-cerebral and often over-educated intellectual who manifests as an avatar of disinterested plausibility."...

It is usually suffered by "intellectuals", those folks that see themselves as having nothing left to learn. They are convinced that their "liberal" education has given them all of the wisdom and knowledge that they can ever need.

Theaplegia is basically a lack of imagination (and in some respects, a lack of empathy), an unwillingness (or inability) to mentally "walk in someone else's shoes". It is a condition of having a closed mind, generally a finger-pointing "liberal" accusing Conservatives of being close-minded, all the while not seeing the three fingers pointed back at himself.

It would be best for you to go read the FrontPageMag piece, as it applies to the New Republic magazine.

Labels: ,

|

Checks and Balances...Or Where is Your Safe House?

That is why we have our freedom - because we have had checks and balances against human nature, against what Lord Acton warned us. We are not supposed to be afraid of our government and they are not supposed to be afraid of us.

As we now live in a world where God-given rights can be taken away with the stroke of a President's pen (or a verbal command); where your use of a credit card/debit card at gas stations could be tracked across the country...here are some sobering thoughts by way of Common Folk Using Common Sense and Western Rifle Shooters Association.

20 Questions...20 Troubling Questions - that in a free society, we shouldn't have to consider. But we are no longer is a position to not worry about...

If your spouse ran into the room and said her brother - a state trooper - just called to warn that raids under the new Federal assault weapons/domestic terrorism laws were beginning tonight:

1) Would you flee, assuming that you believed yourself to be “a person of interest”?

2) Whether your decision was to flee or to stand, what would your spouse and children do?

3) What would you and your family use as money and travel documents?

4) Would you have an adequate bag or two suitably packed and ready to go for each “fugitive”?

5) Would you have all medical necessities addressed for you and your family (e.g., teeth, immunizations, mitigation of any preexisting conditions, adequate supplies of maintenance drugs, etc.)?

6) What about three-season (fall/winter/spring) clothing for you and each family member?

7) What would you use for transportation?

8) What would you use to refuel your transportation?

9) Where would you go?

10) By what route(s)?

11) Upon arrival, where would you stay and for how long?

12) What would you use for communications (both receive and transmit)?

13) What would you tell your employer?

14) What would you tell your neighbors?

15) What would you tell your friends and family?

16) What would you use to buy what you need while in flight (fuel, food, transport, bribes, etc.)?

17) How would you alter your and your family’s physical appearances while in flight?

18) Who would be your allies trustworthy enough to guard your life and the lives of your family?

19) How would you contact your allies?

20) What are your three alternate plans for each of the preceding questions?

Paranoia or prescience?

"Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster, and what has happened once in 6000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world." - Daniel Webster

Labels: , , ,

|

Just a Few Thoughts on the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution

The recent spate of shootings is troubling, of course because of the human tragedy brought upon innocent individuals and their families, but also because of Rahm Emanuel's admission that "a good crisis shouldn't be wasted" (paraphrasing here), i.e., for the purpose of power-grabbing.

[Some of this seeming increase in shootings may be due to the real economic problems and that portion of our "hysteria" ginned-up by the MSM, partially for ratings, partially to help get Barack Obama into office. Because of this heightened level of fear, more people are feeling hopeless, a situation exacerbated by the Leftist media culture attacking prayer as a way of calming oneself. Prayer - not as an "opiate", but as a way of momentarily isolating ourselves from "the madding crowd" and regaining the perspective of - there's a reason for everything, even if we don't understand it.]

"The gun" is the common tool, but the common thread through these mass-shootings is the likely attitude of the shooter. They no doubt blame others for their bad situation. It's society's fault, it's "their" fault, it is...someone else. They only focus on the forward-pointing finger and not at the three pointed back at themselves. While it is true that everyone "gets screwed" (in a bad way) at some point in their lives - by circumstances and by other people - either through their own klutziness or on purpose - been there, done that numerous times - how we handle it is up to us.

Sometimes we can fight back, sometimes we just have to take it. How it affects your life is in "your own lap". Aside from time healing the wounds, prayer can have a calming effect. Sometimes karma takes care of things, though it may take years.

When the MSM (as in ABC) is wringing their hands, wanting the government to "do something" and the sheeple start to follow, that is when we are in the greatest danger. Politicians and the MSM never propose disarming criminals, they instead go for the easiest targets. The law-abiding citizens.

Self-defense of yourself, your family, and of your home is a God-given right. Defense against the lawless, defense against wild animals (in rural settings), defense against mobs, defense against the tyranny of an out-of-control government - taking responsibility is what it is about. But that makes you an independent thinker and a thorn in-the-side of a government interested in ever-growing power. They want a needy, compliant populace.

[I have long-believed that one of the long-term reasons for disarming the public is because the government fears future tax riots. Once upon a time, I believed these were a couple decades away - but the Democrat/RINO orgy of the late-2nd Bush 43 term, exacerbated by the 2006 Democrat wins in the House and Senate and the steroid-intoxicated spending of the current Congress - it may be closer than we think.]

Common Folk Using Common Sense - a fellow Georgia blogger - has a couple of good, recent posts on this subject, so if you finish (or tire of) my rant, go read this one and this one.

Above all else, remember that the Conservative philosophy is about power to the individual (within a framework of limited government) in the name of preserving freedom, while Leftists (the are not liberals anymore) are obsessed with gaining power and control over people. Chaos helps their long-term goal.

In the name of freedom for the next two generations, at least, we have to stay awake. It may have to be something as simple as - when someone brings up the idea of "getting rid of guns" - saying "Great, let's disarm the criminals first, then we will talk about it". Politely ask them questions to force them to voice and thereby defend their emotionally-derived, hollow positions.

Labels: , , , ,

|

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

It is Late and I Am Still Working Online...

So the Tuesday video(s) may have to wait until tomorrow. Unless I find something in the next few minutes.
|

Thursday, April 02, 2009

Thursday Videos - Highlighting the Integrity (or Lack Thereof)...

of ground-based weather stations.

By way of YouTube user GlobalWarmingFraud:



I am sure that most of you are used to the broader concept of the Urban Heat Island Effect. As there are regional and local effects of pavement, brick/masonry buildings, vehicle traffic, changes in land-use patterns, etc., on a smaller scale, these things can affect the micro-climate around a weather station. The video graphically illustrates this. For more info, see the cited blog SurfaceStations.org. [When talking to my classes about the Urban Heat Island Effect, I ask them to consider if having a weather station at a large airport is a good idea, considering the massive expanse of pavement, jet exhaust, etc.. I generally get some afirmative nods to this concept.]

[Without reading the official guidelines, just using Common Scientific Sense] - For a ground weather station to be accurate for temperatures, it must remain under consistent conditions.

Ideally, it should not be close to hardwood trees, which because of the shade factor, would skew the station towards slightly cooler temps during the growing season at certain times of the day.

If there is a stand of trees nearby (beyond shadow distance) and the trees are cut down and replaced by a parking lot, that might affect the micro-climate. The placement of the station near constant or sporadic heat sources (brick and other non-wood buildings, air conditioning units, exhaust fans, etc.), over the course of time might affect temperatures.

Another consideration concerning past stations. Sometimes the stations get moved, which will mean a change of local micro-climate.

As the paint on the outside of the shelter weathers, it loses some of its gloss and becomes more of a sunlight-absorbing dusty white matte finish. If spiders build webs across the ventilation louvers, the web can catch small leaves. [I have been upclose to a rural weather station and have observed such things, without considering the broader implications.]

These considerations (and others) do not represent any final conclusions either way, but when you are collecting data to be scrutinized to the tenth or one-hundredth of a degree by computers, insisting on consistent data collection is not an improper request. Especially when someone is using conclusions based upon that data to lobby for law and regulation changes that will affect us in possibly adverse ways.

Labels: , , , ,

|

Thursday Videos - That Polar Bear Photo - Explained

By way of Moonbattery and YouTube user ReuWil:



I knew the photo had been taken in the summer (August) and I knew a few other details, but had forgotten the sources.

So if any friends/acquaintances mention the photo, calmly ask them if they know when the photo was taken. And if they bring up the issue of the 4 dead polar bears, they died as a result of a storm.

For today's polar bears to exist, their ancestors had to survive previous periods of warming and cooling, without our help or influence. As did the ancestors of their prey.

Labels: , , , , ,

|

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

Tuesday Videos - on Wednesday

'cause some things are too rich to wait until for Thursday.

By way of American Thinker and YouTube comes South Park's explanation of the mortgage crisis:



As an advisory, as this is copyrighted material, there is always the possibility of it being withdrawn due to a legal challenge to YouTube.

No political correctness here.

Labels: , , ,

|

He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named

No, this is not a reference to Voldemort, arch villain of the Harry Potter series, but perhaps to Barack Obama, if he runs for re-election in 2012. Or to any incumbents or challengers anointed by the MSM (serving as an arm of the Democrat Party). They can freely give time and publicity to those chosen politicians, but we can't.

In this American Thinker post are details of the most recent challenge to the hideous McCain-Feingold act (called the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act - BCRA) and the lengths to which the Obama Administration will take its interpretations, for the purpose of consolidating and keeping power for the Democrat party.

The challenge, aka Citizens United vs. FEC, is based upon actions as described here:

..."The group Citizens United produced a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton during her failed presidential campaign. (Citizens United also made a similar film about Barack Obama, though this lawsuit focused on the Clinton movie.) But when the group sought to market the movie through Video On Demand, the FEC blocked it. The FEC cited BCRA, which makes it a federal felony to fund any TV or radio broadcast that names a candidate for federal office in the thirty days prior to a primary election or sixty days prior to a general election, called the "blackout" periods."...

As we well know, part of the purpose of this legislation is to protect incumbents. The post continues:

..."Far more important than the specific facts in this case was the enormous scope of power that the Obama Administration was claiming under BCRA, an array so broad that the justices balked at the government's answers to their questions. The Obama Administration claimed that BCRA allows the federal government to ban a 600-page book if it mentions a candidate's name only once, a 90-minute movie if it mentions a candidate's name once, or even a toy action figure of a candidate. If the organization uses a single dime of its general funds to produce, promote or distribute any such materials during the "blackout" periods, it becomes a federal crime. "... [Emphasis added.]

The post continues:

...The issue in these cases is the freedom of individuals to act together to speak out on public matters. As Ted Olson explained in his opening statement, "Participation in the political process is the First Amendment's most fundamental guarantee. Yet that freedom is being smothered by one of the most complicated, expensive, and incomprehensible regulatory regimes ever invented.""...

The post continues:

..."Citizens United v. FEC perfectly reflects these concerns. As Olson emphasized in his closing statements, BCRA includes draconian penalties for alleged violations. Selling a banned movie, book or even toy action figure is a felony under this law, punishable by five years in federal prison. If someone can only speak out about political candidates by facing such a possibility, Olson concluded, "He won't dare take the chance.""...

If it applies to selling a "banned movie, book, or even toy action figure", it could be applied to loaning of these items, too - IMHO. That is the nature of tyranny, where there are "living rules or laws", where they can "make it up as they go along". When there are no longer any "checks and balances".

There have been concerns that McCain-Feingold could be applied to the internet/blogosphere. So imagine if in 2012, if Democrats have gotten talk radio banned and the internet is under watch during the blackout periods before primaries (30 days) and the general election (60 days) - will only the MSM be allowed to serve as chearleaders for their chosen candidates or incumbents? Will you have to cower in fear of checkpoints with government agents looking for banned campaign materials that may have been produced before the blackout period? Will yard signs and bumper stickers be banned during those time periods? Will they be used as probable cause for searches of homes and cars?

Thankfully, it seems that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has been steadfast in his protection of these aspects of free speech, i.e., he has helped maintain a 5-4 margin along with the conservative judges in prior cases, so there is hope that he will side with Citizens United. Will that last? Will he have the courage to swim against the tide? If Anthony Kennedy will defend the 1st Amendment in the Supreme Court, will he defend the 2nd Amendment?

Labels: , ,

|

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