Belief

I recently came upon a photo of a couple holding a sign on which their beliefs were listed. The couple were participating in some sort of outdoor event, which I'm guessing may have had some political agenda.

The sign was basically a laundry list of bumper sticker slogans; the entire list could be classified as an Internet meme. The list of their beliefs is as follows:
Black Lives Matter
No Human is illegal
Love is love
Women's Rights Are Human Rights
Science is Real
Water is Life
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere

I felt I might address each of these slogans with my own interpretation of the sentiments behind each individual slogan.

Black Lives Matter
I've come to find this a troubling slogan. Of course, Black lives matter, but so do the lives of every single human individual regardless of race, ethnicity or skin color. I don't particularly like the idea of segregating the different "lives that matter" into separate groups. In the WOKE culture, one is now considered racist if you believe that All Lives Matter.

No Human is illegal
The implication of this slogan is that the term "illegal alien" is no longer appropriate. In the wider sense, it suggests that borders should be eliminated. Being the husband of a woman that immigrated to the United States, I have sympathy for anyone wanting to come to the United States for a better life, but I'm also aware that unlimited migration into any country isn't workable. It certainly isn't "fair" that people that can walk into the U.S. from their country should take precedent over people from Asia, Europe or Africa who have no choice but to enter the country legally. I know quite a few Filipinos who would come to the United States today if it weren't for the visa requirements.

Love is love
I've come to see this slogan as support for same-sex marriage. In my opinion, the Government should remove itself from the issue of marriage. I see marriage as essentially a religious ceremony...I don't quite see the reasoning behind pledging your love for someone before a government official. When a couple choose to marry, the couple should present themselves to their religious advisor - priest, pastor, rabbi, qazi or madhun. If your religion sanctions same-sex marriage, then no outsider should have a say in the matter. However, there are many religious groups which are opposed to same-sex marriage, and their believers should not be forced to participate or sanction a ceremony that goes against their religion .

Women's Rights Are Human Rights
If by "Women's Rights" one means actual "Women's Rights", then there is no question that those Rights should be supported. However, if by "Women's Rights" you mean "abortion rights" then you've lost me. I have to go back to an earlier statement that All Lives Matter. An unborn human fetus is a human being that is entitled to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Jumping ahead to the next slogan, it's clear that the human fetus has it's own unique DNA and is a separate individual from the mother.

Science is real
Yes, science is real, but unfortunately scientific beliefs are political. I know certain Liberal leaning folks who believe the science if the science supports their views on climate change or COVID, but who ignore the science when it supports Conservative ideas on sex and biology.
Likewise, I know quite a few Right-leaning folks who might embrace the science when it supports their Right to Life beliefs, but are reluctant to follow the science when it contradicts their particular interpretation of the Bible.

Water is Life
Honestly, I don't know anyone who against clean water.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere
It's hard to argue against that point from a humanitarian viewpoint. But, I wonder if those holding a sign advocating that principle are willing to do whatever it takes to eliminate injustice around the world. Are they willing to boycott every nation that doesn't live up to their standards of justice? Are they willing to send combat troops to countries which do not hold the same values on Human Rights?

Unfortunately, my entire belief system can't be explained in a single blog post, and it certainly can't be summarized on one sign.

Follow the Science?

In a recent opinion piece for aljazeera.com [In science we trust], Andrew Mitrovica tells us that now that the "white-coat army" of scientists and physicians have lead the way to realizing humanity’s salvation by kinda-sorta-almost-very nearly tackling COVIS-19, we should finally address the problem of climate change by.......ta da !!!!..... following the science.

Of course, it might have been helpful if Mitrovica had actually explained what he means by that.

Groups such as Fridays for Future demand that we
1) Keep the global temperature rise below 1.5 °C compared to pre-industrial levels.
2) End Fossil Fuel Investments, and
3) Listen to the best united science currently available.

How do we keep global temperature below 1.5 °C compared to pre-industrial levels? One way, activists say, is to end fossil fuel investments world wide. Unfortunately for activists, people have a need for energy. How can those in the "global North" survive in winter without heating? We need fossil fuel to power the trucks and trains that transport food from one location to another. Can we reasonably expect people to sit back and freeze and face starvation?

People all over the planet have come to expect a certain lifestyle which depends on reliable energy sources. Electricity and clean water come with a cost.

What does it mean to "Ensure climate justice and equity" and secure "Climate justice and equity for everyone"? Should the poor in the Third World do without the "luxuries" that First World people call "basic necessities" ?

I agree that certain changes in the environment need to happen, but those changes can't happen without a one world, totalitarian government in control of the planet. In spite of what many may think, we're nowhere near that yet.

Climate Scientist Jane Fonda

Climate scientist Jane Fonda is upset with President Joe Biden, who she says is not moving fast enough on climate change.

According to Fonda,
"He's done a lot and we're really grateful. But the crisis is too severe to do a few good things here and then not do anything where bad stuff is happening."

Climate scientist Jane Fonda is also quoted as saying
"The scientists say we have less than nine years to cut our emissions in half."

I'm sorry to say that it is impossible for the people on this planet to cut emissions in half in nine years. If what she says is correct then it's all over. If we only have nine years, as climate scientist Jane Fonda tells us, then you might as well kiss your ass goodbye.

Alice's Restaurant Today

 

In one of yesterday's posts, I mentioned that one of my "Daily Mixes" on Spotify was called "Classic Acoustic", which contains a variety of music from the late 60's/early 70's that, presumably would appeal to old farts like myself. As I mentioned, after hearing song # 3 (1952 Vincent Black Lightning by Richard Thompson) I left the Daily Mix and went off to learn more about Thompson and his music.

This morning, I went back to the mix to listen to #4 - Alice's Restaurant Massacree by Arlo Guthrie.

Alice's Restaurant Massacree was released in 1967. Things have certainly changed since then. Listening to the song as recorded then, I heard a number of ideas expressed which may have been considered "hip" or "progressive" at the time, but which would be frowned upon by the woke folk of today.

 

Afterward, I listened to Guthrie's 50th anniversary rendition to see what, if anything had been updated to pacify the woke.

Of course, there wasn't much one could change about the first part of the song where Guthrie tells of his throwing away "a half a ton" of garbage in a rural area. He couldn't leave out that section because part two would not be understandable without the first part. His description of the garbage incident was still mocking and sarcastic. This time around, however there was no knowing and agreeing laughter from the audience. The woke crowd seriously frowns upon disregard for the environment. Hell, now throwing the garbage away in the city dump is something the Left is against......his throwing away trash the way he did is even worse in today's world. I'm a little surprised that Guthrie hasn't been cancelled for the garbage incident.

When he gets to the second part of the song, which deals with the draft board, his trying to explain to people today what the draft board was seemed a little awkward. I wouldn't expect him to receive much push back from the Left on his anti-war/anti-authority views in the second portion, but I was curious to see what he would do with the reference to "faggots" that comes near the end of the song.

He sidestepped that hurdle. The word was not used in the newer version of the song; instead a mention of how some bigoted folks in Texas might object to a couple singing the Alice's Restaurant jingle, while they applied for a marriage license was substituted.

For many years, an FM radio station in Atlanta would broadcast the song on Thanksgiving Day. I don't know if that's still being done. I'm waiting to see if Guthrie will be eaten by the Left any time soon.

Isn't Biology "Science" Too?

When being lectured on climate change or the covid 19 pandemic, we are often told to listen to the scientists......follow the science.

I don't have a problem with that advice. During this pandemic, I've avoided crowds, I observe social distancing, I never go out without a face mask and will carry a face shield when going to those places that might require them. I don't object when my body temperature is checked before I enter a business.

As for climate change, I acknowledge that the planet's average temperature is rising, due in large part to human activity. I don't dispute the science, but I do question some of the solutions put forward by some activists. The idea that people on this planet will suddenly stop using fossil fuels for transportation or the production of electricity isn't a practical solution. 

The folks living in the so-called first world are too dependent on the automobile to ever expect them to give up the car. If automobiles operating with an internal combustion engine were to disappear, replacing them with electric vehicles would cause the current electrical grid to fall apart. Producing electricity with solar and wind without the use of fossil fuels would exacerbate the situation.

I have no problem listening to the science, but isn't biology a science too?

Far too many folks, who believe themselves to be following the science, seem to ignore the science involving DNA. These people seem to forget "science" when science tells us that the human fetus is, well, a human. A human fetus can only grow to become a fully functioning human. A human fetus cannot magically transform into a dog, or cat, or dolphin or some alien life form. Killing a fetus in the womb is killing a human being. That is an undeniable scientific fact.

The DNA of the fetus also proves that the fetus is a separate and distinct individual and not a body part of the mother. Prematurely removing a fetus from a mother's body, by way of abortion, is not the same as removing an appendix. 

While we're on the subject of DNA, examining the DNA shows that human beings come in only one of two genders. An individual's DNA and chromosomal makeup reveals whether the person in question is male or female. No matter how you may feel about whether or not you're in the "right body", your DNA reveals your gender.

So, when you lecture me about following the sciences, just be sure you follow the biological science as well.

Typhoon Rolly and Climate Change

 

Naturally, with the coming of this Super Typhoon to Philippines, I've been pondering the effect climate change is having on tropical storms. For years I've read and heard that with the increased temperatures, the number and intensity of the storms will also increase. Recently, however, I heard a conservative pundit state that this idea had been "debunked".

Contradicting that conservative pundit we have this article:

How Climate Change May Be Impacting Storms Over Earth's Tropical Oceans:

"There’s no easy answer, says Joao Teixeira, co-director of the Center for Climate Sciences at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, and science team leader for the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite. 'Within the scientific community it’s a relatively well-accepted fact that as global temperatures increase, extreme precipitation will very likely increase as well,' he says. 'Beyond that, we’re still learning.'
While there’s not yet a full consensus on the matter, in recent years a body of evidence linking extreme weather with climate change has begun to emerge. Evidence from satellites, aircraft, ground measurements and climate model projections are increasingly drawing connections. Quantifying those interconnections is a big challenge".

My take from the article is that, while it may not yet be settled, it's logical to assume that climate change is having some effect.

Assuming, for the sake of argument that storms are intensifying due to climate change, I see no solution in sight. There is very little chance that carbon emissions will decrease to acceptable levels. Fossil fuels are here to stay. The internal combustion engine will not vanish over night.

No one wants to voluntarily lower their standard of living - "it's ok for the other guy, but not for me" seems to be the general attitude.

I live as "carbon neutral" as I can get - I do very little driving and the little I do is to places near my house. I can't say that for the majority of people I know in the U.S.. Long commutes to and from work is common.

Our electricity on this island comes from a geothermal plant which emits little carbon dioxide, very low amounts of sulfur dioxide, and no nitrogen oxides. The same cannot be said for most people on the planet.

We try to use as many locally produced foodstuffs as we can. That cuts down on fuel costs, somewhat, but there are some items which we consider "must have" which come from other locations. That's certainly true for many people in the world. Just as it's too hot in Philippines to have locally produced cow's milk, it's too cold in the U.S. to grow bananas, coffee, tea and a million other items Americans want on their grocery store shelves.

As I said, no one wants to voluntarily lower their standard of living. It would take a planet wide, totalitarian government determined to alter lifestyles. In spite of what some of my more conservative friends may believe, I don't see that happening.