[Vision2020] Global Warming: The North Pole is now a lake.

Thu Jul 25 15:34:20 PDT 2013

In the Zimmerman case, there are two basic stories.  Zimmerman contends that he was attacked by Martin and forced to defend himself when Martin saw his gun.  There is evidence to support their altercation: Zimmerman's broken nose and lacerated head, blood on Martin's fist, water on Zimmerman's back and legs.

The other story is that Zimmerman stalked Martin, and gunned him down.  How did Zimmerman get his injuries if that was the case?  Did he attack Martin first?  Why does Martin have no other injuries?  Did they fight for the gun?  Is there any evidence for that? Etc.  Yet everyone assumes this to be true because Zimmerman is white and Martin is black (while at the same time calling Zimmerman out for being a racist).

I don't know how dire the threat was to Zimmerman's life.  But since every indication I've come across indicates that Martin attacked Zimmerman, then it doesn't really matter to me.  If you attack someone, one of the things that might happen is that they might be armed and try to defend themselves.  Trying to draw an exact line blow-by-blow in the fight seems counterproductive to me.  If someone is actively beating on you, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think your life might be in danger or you might get grievously injured if the fight continued.  Plus there's the "you're going to die tonight" thing that may or may not have happened.  It's tragic, but I can't lay this one down at Zimmerman's feet like everyone here, the media, and even the President want me to do.  Martin is just as responsible for his own death.  They both could have avoided this.

Anyway, I thought we were discussing climate change and attempts to moderate it.  I have no wish to slog through the crap that is the Martin/Zimmerman debate any more.  You can all have fun denigrating Zimmerman on your own.  Fuck Zimmerman!  Woohoo!

Paul

________________________________
 From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
Cc: Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Global Warming: The North Pole is now a lake.

But you supported Zimmerman. He did something drastic precisely because he felt a threat. There it didn't matter much if the treat was real -- you never gave objective data about a treat; nor did you seem to care. His feeling of being threatened was enough to justify his excessive actions.

On Jul 25, 2013, at 2:19 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:

There are certain generic precautions that could be taken, such as making sure the door is locked and the outside lights are on, etc.  This would be equivalent to beefing up our readiness levels for natural disasters and making sure we have food stored and so forth.  It's helpful anyway.
>
>Before I did anything drastic, though, I would want knowledge that there actually is a guy out there with a gun before I did anything drastic. Action for the sake of action can be just as dangerous as inaction.  The guy-with-a-gun equivalent would be shooting at a target without knowing if that target is a threat.  The global-warming equivalent would be imposing a drastic carbon-trading scheme (for example) that cripples our economy, after which we find out it was really just a 100-year-long blip in the data after
 all.
>
>Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
>To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>; viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
>Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:10 PM
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Global Warming: The North Pole is now a lake.
> 
>
>
>Suppose you think you see a man outside with a gun. Half the folks think it is a man with a fun, the other half have no idea what it is. What do you do? Does the fact that IF you are correct, your life might be in danger figure into the decision? In other words, if the risk of not believing is great, wouldn't you want to err on the side of caution given that half the folks think there is danger?
>
>On Jul 25, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>Every year ice melts on large stretches of the ice cap where it cannot drain into the ocean.  It forms ponds, puddles, lakes, whatever you want to call them.  This happens at the North Pole as well as at other locations on the ice pack.  This is one of the reasons determining sea ice area is difficult.  It's hard to tell ocean water from water-on-top-of-the-ice sometimes.  Currently, both the sea ice extent and sea ice area numbers are higher than they were last year and higher than they were in 2011 or 2007.  Here is a nice place where a lot of the charts are linked to from the same source: http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/  I must warn you that Ted hates this website, but since it's a bunch of links to data from official sciency-type places, I think it's OK to start there.
>>
>>I tend to watch the NORSEX SSM/I extent and area charts, since those are the charts I've been following for a few years now.  There are also lots of other interesting graphs, as well as the webcam images from the north pole used in the article.  If you go there and look at the two web cams right now, you'll see that only one looks like it's in a lake.  The other  one looks to be safely on solid ice/snow pack.
>>
>>I don't say this out of some sort of effort to promote climate denialism in an attempt to wreak havoc on the framework of American Life and to lead your kids to rock music, I say it to stem the "OMG! The North Pole is a lake!  We're all dooooomed!" hysteria.  I have no idea how this year will turn out in terms of minimum extent or area compared to previous years, but I'd rather look at the pretty graphs than take all my information from a webcam
 image.
>>
>>Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> From: Kenneth Marcy <kmmos1 at frontier.com>
>>To: viz <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
>>Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 10:37 AM
>>Subject: [Vision2020] Global Warming: The North Pole is now a lake.
>> 
>>
>>
>>If ever there was any doubt in your mind about global warming, consider this news:
>>
>>The North Pole, that great bastion of eternal cold and barren ice, is a lake.
>>It’s a shallow lake. It’s a cold lake. But it is, actually, a lake.
>>According to the North Pole Environmental Observatory, the summer ice is melting away at unprecedented rates. The sea of snow is now meltwater.
>>
>>http://o.canada.com/2013/07/24/the-north-pole-is-now-a-lake/ 
>>
>>
>>Ken 
>>=======================================================
>>List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>              http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>=======================================================
>>
>>
>=======================================================
>>List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>              http://www.fsr.net
>>         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>=======================================================
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20130725/b9f53ce6/attachment.html>