Bwild: Is 2012 going to be another 1975 - Y2K thing?

Artful Dodger: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/projections/

"Climate projections

Because we can’t know the future for certain, our climate change scientists use computer-based climate models to project plausible scenarios, or projections, for coming centuries.

It is important to be aware that projections from climate models are always subject to uncertainty because of limitations on our knowledge of how the climate system works and on the computing resources available. Different climate models can give different projections."

**************************

Climategate and Iraqgate..... ???

Übergeek 바둑이: This is just an inquiry to get the facts out. If at the end there is enough evidence to force some sort of court, then their will be one. Who and how... dunno. But the weight of public opinion over here by civilians, soldiers and their relatives is such that they want to know why we went to war.

Looks like it was just blood lust.. an easy victory for the US people to see..but a bad idea.

That 10 days before the war the UK intelligence knew pretty much Saddam was a wet paper bag in terms of military might and WMD capability is not good. We were led into this war on the basis Saddam could launch in 45 minutes WMD's (not on freeing the people of Iraq) ... Things will hit the fan.. but how much... that's another matter.

Crucial meeting

Its remit is to look into UK involvement in Iraq between 2001 and 2009, with the first few weeks focusing on policy in the build-up to the 2003 US-led invasion. On the third day of public hearings, Sir Christopher attacked the UK-backed process of weapons inspections in the run-up to the war, saying officials had been forced to scramble for a "smoking gun" while US troops gathered. But most attention focused on when he believed the decision to go to war had become inevitable.

Sir Christopher said the UK believed it was "pointless" to resist US plans for regime change in Iraq a full year before the invasion and speculated that the path to war was set at a meeting between the two leaders at President Bush's Texas ranch in April 2002.

Critics of the war maintain this was the moment that the prime minister pledged his support for toppling Saddam Hussein. Sir Christopher said no advisers were present for much of the meeting and therefore he could not be "entirely clear what degree of convergence was, if you like, signed in blood".

But he said there were "clues" in a speech given by Mr Blair the next day when he mentioned the possibility of regime change for the first time. "When I heard that speech, I thought that this represents a tightening of the UK-US alliance and a degree of convergence on the danger that Saddam Hussein presented," he told the inquiry. Sir Christopher, who left Washington in 2003, said Mr Blair was a "true believer in the wickedness of Saddam Hussein", his views pre-dating the election of the Bush administration.

"Sea-change"

Before 9/11 the US viewed Iraq as "a grumbling appendix", he said, but that policy was focused on supporting dissident groups and toughening sanctions rather than on military action. However, he said there had been a "sea-change" in attitudes after 9/11 which the British government had been forced to react to.

He said he had received "new" instructions in March 2002 - just weeks before the meeting between Mr Blair and President Bush - from Sir David Manning, the prime minister's foreign policy's adviser, about the UK's position over Iraq. Downing Street believed that "the fact that 9/11 had happened" meant it was "a complete waste of time" to say that the UK cannot support regime change, said Sir Christopher.

At our current technology level a dilemma arises. When it comes to measuring things like length.. the more accurate we try and be the less accurate we can measure thanks to quantum mechanics...

If we take all the 'space' out of matter.. we can fit all the matter that makes up the human race into the space of a sugar cube.

Funny ol' world.

Tuesday: The bible states in Genesis that things happened in an order, simple to complicated with mankind happening pretty recently.... Evolution says the same. It's not a denial of an almighty sPiRiT, just that it took time. As you said... time back then.. who knows.

As for Adam and Eve.. that was a fix up by God... it explains the difference between immortal and mortal.

GTCharlie: And you point (as you say there are many 'isms') is about socialism.. or a certain one is??

Bwild: Hey.. one word.. Vodka!!!!

Tuesday:

Footnotes:

1. Job 40:15 Possibly the hippopotamus or the elephant
2. Job 40:17 Possibly trunk
3. Job 40:24 Or by a water hole.

The footnotes can explain alot. Sailors use to say alot "there be monsters" but that was just a matter of not knowing what something is and being frightened of big things that could sink their ship.

Bwild: How? Are all socialists depressed??

Tuesday: The seven day thing comes from Egyptian knowledge of the world and of the need to plant in season. They worked out 365 days a year plus the week. And Moses was taught as an Egyptian.

"Judaism has no problem with Darwin or many other theories." of the Torah aka OT.. I believe and trust they are the experts.

"but it's a huge deception."

Why?

And btw... if Wisdom was the first of God's creations.. ie before the world was created, how long did that take? Ie the creation story as in one week does not fit with the knowledge we have of the universe, it's size and movement. It does not hold that it is not true as in God (the being God, not a old white bearded man) .. In fact from recent documentaries, the story of Genesis is more important and matches what we know of the physical and emotional world and how they interface.

And yes.. we are still learning. The science that was taught at school 20 years ago or more.. it's out of date.

Tuesday: If all in science lived by dogma.. then would the world be still flat? The Earth still at the centre of the universe and this solar system? Should we go back to where scientists faced death when they challenged dogma??

There would be no Protestant religions, we'd still be all part of the RCC.

Anyway... It's part of the Torah.. and Judaism has no problem with Darwin, seeing as it's their religious text maybe some should just accept that.

GTCharlie: What is socialism then.. what you think it is?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

That sounds... socialist.

Ferris Bueller: It's not communist or socialist not to want to have 24/7 political broadcast bombardment... it's called not wanting to have the same rubbish shoved down your throat 24/7!!

If anyone says to you that's not American, then suggest to them they can have your share and sit in a room 24/7 just watching 'important messages'.

Maybe with some chocolate pretzels... bit melted, but still good. If you know your "Mallrats"

Ferris Bueller: It is crazy, party's can quite easily say their peace and get their message across in a couple of ads a day. I guess money talks!!

Ferris Bueller: Ouch... That is something we don't get. I think it's to do with fairness of representation.

Ferris Bueller: Nahhh allocated space on TV for political broadcasts. Time here is limited so we don't end up with endless 'important messages'

Ferris Bueller: ... what's the policy on part political broadcasts in the states?

Artful Dodger: As long as business can lobby government in the way yours can, combined with election funding... they are always going to be intertwined. It ain't just a USA thing, our government closed down an investigation in bribery as it would have cost a defence company a big contract.

As for Palin.. $250K wasn't it on campaign clothing... alot of dosh for campaign clothes that came from supporters BIG and small.

As for naked... interesting.. I wonder if birthday suit debates would get more honesty out of the politicians???

Artful Dodger: I'd agree with you, if it were not that business does interfere with government. As such in the western world there is no real separation of the two. As such companies try to become 'brands' (such as coke).. talking of which.. Santa these days is wearing which companies colours?

Politicians relaying on contributions for their election campaigns from businesses. Sarah Palin got through alot of 'suits' in the last Republican campaign to be in power, didn't she .. do I need to get you to do an essay on the lobbying system?

Artful Dodger: Rubbish, at least not in the way we have it today.

"most of the blame can be levelled at the politics and attitudes of sovereignty."

I cannot agree, not when you've had the likes of the car industry approach Nixon to delay the introduction of seat belts and the wearing of.

Capitalism can become an ideology and as such the perceived needs to protect it can be over the top. And as such the Cold war was over the two systems. Communism or Capitalism. And then you have the big industry bosses creaming the public wallet or skipping on safety.

Artful Dodger: And no matter how you spin it you cannot deny that the USA as well as other democratic western governments have stuck their nose in and helped and aided those they like... you called it the enemy of your enemy I believe.

This has included rather nasty people in the belief.. better dead then red is the old saying isn't it? Saying "we didn't do anything" is denial of the logistical and financial aide given to people to fight and kill perceived enemies of the west.

And I'm not saying communism (to use a loose term as it was just a disguised dictatorship scheme) is innocent, but neither is the west.

"Capitalism is an economic system that vastly differs from all others. It's not really a system at all but a lack of a system."

so was communism as under the USSR system. No real system to talk about as it didn't work.

Artful Dodger: And in the past.. who made the laws? Back in da old days those who implemented the law were often the ones making it. I see people getting laws through Parliament. Judges saying old laws don't apply.

You can argue this point all you like, it will not make it true.

Artful Dodger: A legal precedent can lead to complete law changes or ways things are done in the judicial system. It may not be intentional law making, but can lead to it.

Artful Dodger: Courts can make legal precedent. I'm reasonably positive this is not the only way courts can influence law.

Artful Dodger: .. A stone makes ripples in a pond, they say through six people we know everyone.

In other words.. how sure that where there appears to be no shared interest there is no shared interest or an indirect effect.

Artful Dodger: So can we over here. Our laws allow a civilian to put forward proposals and law changes through their MP or a campaign, etc.

"t least when the US does it, there is freedom in view. Take East Berlin for an example."

The cold war caused oppressive dictatorial governments to be set up/supported by both the free west and the communist east. Who's freedom? If a country is used in order to maintain one's borders it's not free. People flocked to the UK after WWII and still do, even though other Euro states will take them, the UK is the preferred destination.

"Stay out of their business except where it concerns our shared interests."

ChAoS theory applies to such a view.

Ferris Bueller: Throwback to slavery unfortunately, still the idea that white is God.. or as in today's world.. hetro and American.

Übergeek 바둑이: the masses ain't stupid, nowadays there is no such thing as a totally contolled media, even in 'restricted' populations. Misled at times.. yes. Fear is a powerful tool and can result in a 'don't care' situation where governments can do things that are 'invisible' ..

That time is ending.. the internet saw to that, as does the old word of mouth. Communities talk, just wish the media moguls would stop perverting events.

Artful Dodger: If you are not a democracy, and you find as such "impossible to sustain"...

.. why does your governments go putting it on others. And as such, a republice is just a variation on democracy surely. A representative democracy instead of a direct one or a deliberative democracy.

And these days.. is there such a thing as a pure democracy?

Übergeek 바둑이: Someone said, democracy is not perfect, but it's the best system so far.

The majority are use to being played, in certain respects they play on our hard wiring.. Thinking is discouraged in certain areas. Politicians play the game and so do the media.. and of course... the adverts selling stuff.

... a tv show did a test re in-store advertising on 'special offers'. To cut a long story short.. make sure they are real 'special offers', as most of those put to the test didn't and spent more then just going for regular stock.

Pedro Martínez: Yes it is.. but there is also the consideration on how much money does one need? A couple over here won £45 million in the Euro lottery. That's £2 million a year in interest. Footballers wanting £100K a week in wages. One got slammed for moving club over being paid only £55K a week.

I don't think those who've got 100's of millions+ would miss a 0.1% contribution to a local scheme, whether local council or to local charities.

Ahhhh on a survey of 27 countries around the world by the BBC only 11% were happy with the way capitalism is at the mo. the majority by far feel we need more regulation and reform.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8347409.stm

Ferris Bueller: Well.. it is the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall. And this week our government face quite a kick up the butt over the principle that independent advisers do have the right to have a view. They are facing a possibility of a major walk out by various expert independent groups.

Übergeek 바둑이: The OT has many laws that have been interpreted as laws on homosexuality. Many law interpretations based on the idea that God is purely male.. though it is clear when you read Jewish concepts that God is only male in regards to our relation with God, ie God the Father.

Certain texts are against rape of men by men as happened in Sodom, certain texts are to keep reminding the early Jews against being like the Canaanites. The laws on homosexuality some deem are purely on rape and temple based prostitution, and in some respects based on that man's seed was how babies came into being as at that time the female egg was not known.

How much comes from other religions is vague. It is to remembered that Moses learnt much from the Egyptians (see Corpus Hermeticum) .

As to NT texts, again interpretation is a problem. I would again say (based on OT) that the condemnations were on hetro people abusing same sex ie rape.

As to being modern interpretations... I cannot agree, so much we've lost from the early days through the killings and burnings during the formation of the Roman church.

Czuch: I know... old laws that are so messed up and ignorant of today's real world. In some respects our laws are still very Victorian in nature.

Marriage in general does not mean what it use to, especially when considering today's divorce rates.

Übergeek 바둑이: Not true. Some do, some don't. there has been quite a debate within the Anglican church over being gay and the roles as such within the church.

Judaism does not condemn gay orientation, and depending on the persons views does not condemn homosexual acts. Lesbian acts are not condemned by the Torah at all.

As for "heterosexual marriage is diminished or reduced in meaning."... a documentary blamed much on the pill and that this contraceptive method made 'men' less secure.

Czuch: Equal rights is all most minorities ask for. Ok... you get fringe groups asking to be special, but as a rule. Ignore them. The high majority just want to be treated the same.

And I agree.. common law man and wife ought to have the same rights as married couples. But a certain minimal length of being together has to be in place to stop tax and other fraud.

Czuch: equality...

ok... reverse the situation. gay is normal and hetro is fighting for equality.

Justify yourself.

Czuch: Because it's your the law. If you find it wrong, then do as many people do and get the law changed. duhhhhh

""gay marriage"" No just marriage.

Artful Dodger: You didn't come up with anything anyway, just a C&P from a right wing site that compares same blood sex to same sex sex. They are not the same.

If you want to forget that a man and women can have children and then work out they are gay.. by all means. If you want forget that love is not an animal thing .. by all means.

And btw... "As communities we all live within the parameters of the standards set by the State."

ahhh you like the state now just because it supports your views. So be it.. but be honest and say so.

Czuch: Ok.. I'll never convince you. But that does not mean that gay folk have to have their lives intruded on by your own prejudice.

Artful Dodger: Twister Their ability to reproduce has not gone.

" Maybe they decide not to have kids so then I guess it's ok with you."

I never said that.

Look, the basis of all western ignorance on sexuality is based on bad interpretation of the Bible and those who stand by them. Alot of the old laws in the Bible were to do with sexual acts in the temple. If we go by Genesis then isn't God both male and female??

Czuch: No. That's rubbish. The only possible one of those you mention is polygamy.. which is not a worldwide crime, some places it is traditional and allowed, some it is not.

Brother/sister, etc is due to science of reproduction and the danger of high mutation or the reinforcement of bad genes.

Artful Dodger: Are you saying love is a purely biological matter? I thought love was something beyond biology.

"because their union is incapable of reproducing. "

No, they can reproduce. As in the parts of their anatomy just don't start not working. God does not make them suddenly sterile. Just their sexuality does not give to reproduction (unless bi)....

"I can't marry my sister or my daughter or a very close relative. Such unions are restricted by law as they don't fall under the standard set by society. "

those are set for good reason of high mutation rate through a closed gene pool, not a good example if you are going on about not reproducing being part of why they cannot marry.

"What's really being sought by homosexual advocates is a special standing before the law. "

No. If you missed it (seeing as Fox only covered it quickly) ...there was a gay rights march in Washington at the same time as the tea party and the protest against Obama telling kids to work harder... 75,000+ march... though the Obama telling kids to work harder got more time and a reporter.

... basically... they just want the same rights. Equality under the law.

Artful Dodger: Maybe not, but they can love children. And the marriage is about love, not legality. Legality is a way of keeping your neighbour away. She/He has a ring, she/he is committed. Taxes, census..

Btw.. there are some men and women who cannot create babies. Is marriage allowed for them? What about a person born both male and female... what then.

And that gay folk are discriminated against in the form of legal red tape, that is wrong.

The governments have adopted inaccurate old religious interpretation, just like the one about 'witches' .. Because mistakes have been made, should folk be punished?

Czuch: We are!! I thought, it was the animal side of us that was given to the point of reproduction and that the 'God' in us was capable of controlling that instinct.

As far as I've read abusers are made. Someone being gay is how their spirit is.

Czuch: It's early days for gay marriage rights in the USA and to various degrees the whole world.

Over here we regarding marijuana and drug policy overall there has been a big stir. The advisers to the government for the first time in 30 years have been ignored in preference to politics. The repercussions of that have caused the resignations of advisers and the rest of the council to organise a meeting with the government to seriously question why.

All because Professor Nutt said he thought on scientific grounds the government was wrong.

Ferris Bueller: You already have gone down the slippery slope in certain respects. Bush and his use of "free speech zones" where those protesting against his policies were herded away from the routes Bush took so the press wouldn't see them.

People were arrested for not wanting to go, and a number prosecuted for protesting legally and non-violently.

I think you need your laws clarified to stop this sought of abuse.