Everyone acknowledges that there are four elements that make this world go round. Earth, Air, Fire, And Water..otherwise known as quarters. The practice of using these elements is done everyday - by everyone, though many do not realize it.

The act of magick, or what many deem as sorcery, is not meant for harm - but for change, peace, and even love. The hardwiring put into us as children makes opening up to what we know exist (earth, air, fire, and water) hard to ask for anything in the way of change.

The damage done to this planet, our earth, our home, is felt. You do feel it. How? Every summer when it gets hotter. Every winter that it grows hotter. The air you breathe tastes all more staler. The fires grow more in many locations. (Cali is not the only place that gets wildfires). And water we drink or want to play in has a lot more bacteria in it.

When the Eart is sick - WE are sick. All of the animals, nature, and us on this planet are sick. Balance has to be maintained. Changing the patterns of how we consume. Peace by not destroying nature, (because she will find a way to take back). And love of what this planet is - brings us the elements. You touch them everyday.

Our planet needs help from everyone - all of us to make a difference. Stop racing racing around for your cheese. Stop ignoring what you know in your does exist and what you know must change. Small differences are always noticed - not just by people - but by this planet that has loved and given us life

Brigids Cauldron

Tiamat - Gaia (Wildhoney - 1994)

A new serum eradicates the illness
An old man rises from his wheelchair
When suffering unknown attacks the painless
And common animals are becoming rare

As water spins in circles twice
Spiders, snakes and the little mice
Get twisted around and tumble down
When Nature calls we all shall drown

Just found out real recently a way to do the subtitles for "Miracle In Gansu" (filmed play to DVD) by hand!  This is great!  Finding some LOTR subtitle files for The Fellowship of the Ring (check out this subtitle site, Subscene,) I opened one up in GVIM, and I can edit it! Yahoo!  That means I can do the MIG (Miracle In Gansu to DVD) subtitles and work to finish up the project. (I may post more about MIG later.)

Tomorrow the Everio GZ-HD7 camcorder should arrive, and in the evening I will test it out on a service with guest speaker Dr. Singh, a man of God from India.  He risks his life for Jesus Christ, and he will not back down!  Glory to God.

God bless,

Thanks for listening!

-b

Designing Away The Problems of Offsetting

Dr Nelson warned yesterday the climate change debate should not be allowed to become a "religious crusade", with "people that are running around saying, 'Look, if we don't do this we're going to have disease and death and plague and pestilence and all sorts of dreadful things visited upon us"'. And he repeated his view that by going alone on an ETS, Australia risked "economic suicide".

There is considerable support within the Coalition for a tougher line, with frontbencher Tony Abbott telling The Australian Online yesterday that he thought Dr Nelson was doing "a very good job in calling into question the apocalyptic language of the climate change zealots" and insisting that there was "nothing wrong with debate inside a political party".

Brendan Nelson is right to be cautious over the religious Zealotry so evident in the government of Brother Number one. And despite suggestions By Malcolm Turnbull that we should take up the crusade with an ETS scheme The coalition will realise that this is an issue that they can stand with the people rather than the Gaiaian ideologues who would see us all reduced to penury in pursuit of a course of action that has no possible hope for success.
While surveys do say that the Australians do want to see "something" done about climate change I am willing to bet that if you asked them (the Australian people) if they want to do something symbolic (like a go it alone ETS scheme) or some thing practical that will help us cope with a changing world , that they would chose practcal every time.
Cheers Comrades
;)

Dr Nelson warned yesterday the climate change debate should not be allowed to become a "religious crusade", with "people that are running around saying, 'Look, if we don't do this we're going to have disease and death and plague and pestilence and all sorts of dreadful things visited upon us"'. And he repeated his view that by going alone on an ETS, Australia risked "economic suicide".

There is considerable support within the Coalition for a tougher line, with frontbencher Tony Abbott telling The Australian Online yesterday that he thought Dr Nelson was doing "a very good job in calling into question the apocalyptic language of the climate change zealots" and insisting that there was "nothing wrong with debate inside a political party".

Brendan Nelson is right to be cautious over the religious Zealotry so evident in the government of Brother Number one. And despite suggestions By Malcolm Turnbull that we should take up the crusade with an ETS scheme The coalition will realise that this is an issue that they can stand with the people rather than the Gaiaian ideologues who would see us all reduced to penury in pursuit of a course of action that has no possible hope for success.
While surveys do say that the Australians do want to see "something" done about climate change I am willing to bet that if you asked them (the Australian people) if they want to do something symbolic (like a go it alone ETS scheme) or some thing practical that will help us cope with a changing world , that they would chose practcal every time.
Cheers Comrades
;)

Benannt wurde er nach dem Titan Iapetos aus der griechischen Mythologie, ein Sohn von Gaia, der Erde in Göttergestalt und von Uranos, dem Himmel in Göttergestalt. Iapetos selbst wurde in die lichtlosen Tiefen des Tartaros, einen Teil der Unterwelt verbannt, weil er gegen das Göttergeschlecht aufbegehrt hatte. Er zeugte vier Kinder. Atlas, der dazu verdammt wurde, der Träger des Himmelsgewölbes zu sein. Den überheblichen Krieger Menoitios, auf den Zeus ein Blitz schleuderte und ihn zu einer missgestalteten Figur machte. Prometheus, der Vorausdenkende, der ein Menschenfreund war und ihnen das Feuer und die Kultur brachte. Und Epimetheus, der danach Denkende, der ein Geschenk der Götter gegen den Rat seines Bruders Prometheus annahm, die künstliche wunderschöne Frau Pandora, die als Strafe dafür, dass Prometheus den Menschen das Feuer brachte, die Büchse der Pandora öffnete und Krankheiten und Leid über die Menschheit brachte. Nur die Hoffnung konnte als einzig positive Gabe entweichen. So sehr war das Schicksal der Söhne mit dem Schicksal der Menschen verwoben, sie brachten Heil und Unheil zugleich, genau jenes, welches das Leben in seiner Komplexität ausmacht.

Als nun der Saturn-Mond Iapetus 1671 von Giovanni Cassini entdeckt und 1847 von John Herschel mit diesem Namen ausgestattet wurde, konnte noch keiner ahnen, wie außergewöhnlich und einzigartig dieser Mond mit seiner schwarz-weißen Färbung ist.

Das Denk-Prinzip in Schwarz-Weiß nenne ich das Iapetus-Prinzip.

Ein Denken, das die Dinge vereinfacht, sie reduziert auf ein Maß der eigenen erträglichen oder beabsichtigten Realität, in ein Freund-Feind-Schema, in ein Für und Wider, in Gut und Böse. Aus dieser Simplifikation rekrutieren sich Kriege, Massaker, Vertreibung, Folter und Blutvergießen, wer nicht für uns ist, ist gegen uns, oder auch die Achse der Bösen. Diese oft messianisch betriebene Dynamik kann sich zu einem zerstörerischen Selbstläufer entwickeln, der nur schwer aufzuhalten ist und zu dessen Geiseln wir werden. Erst dadurch wird der Terror ein wirklicher Terror, wenn man ihm jedes Verständnis und seine oft begreiflichen Ursachen abspricht.

Grausamkeit und Verachtung entstehen größtenteils durch das Verurteilen eines anderen Menschen, der seine eigene Version der Wirklichkeit hat. Den Anspruch auf die Wahrheit scheint jeder für sich gepachtet zu haben, sicherlich aus ganz unterschiedlichen Gründen. Zumal ist da das Streben nach Macht und Geltung, auch die Habgier oder die schlichte Angst vor der Kompliziertheit des Lebens. Die Suche nach Rechtfertigungen verlangt nach berechenbarer Klarheit, dort, wo es sie eigentlich nicht gibt. Zu verstrickt sind die natürlichen Zusammenhänge, die uns auf Erden miteinander verbinden und uns voneinander abhängig machen.

Und doch gibt es eine unmissverständliche Plausibilität. Die, den Frieden, die Freiheit und die Menschlichkeit zu wahren, miteinander zu reden und die verschiedenen Standpunkte zu akzeptieren und versöhnliche, umsichtige Kompromisse zu finden. Dafür sollte man die tatsächliche Vielfältigkeit und die eigenen Fehler und Unzulänglichkeiten anerkennen und auch der Rationalität wieder mehr Gewicht geben. Sich nicht nur auf einen Gott berufen oder eine Einteilung in Gläubige und Ungläubige vornehmen, sondern sich auf die Vernunft verlassen, die uns lehrt, dass jeder Einzelne eine menschliche Würde besitzt. Und diese Würde genau so dem Anderen zusprechen und das unter allen Umständen.

Interessanterweise setzt sich die digitalisierte Welt auch aus nur zwei Komponenten zusammen. Sie gaukelt uns ein Blendwerk vor, ähnlich dem Licht des Mondes, der das fremde Sonnenleuchten als sein eigenes reflektiert. Wir kreieren uns einen Schein, den wir als unseren Spiegel zu steuern glauben. Weil wir alle das Gefühl brauchen, unser Schicksal unter Kontrolle zu wissen, eine Sicherheit, mit der sich unsere Sehnsucht nach Sinn verknüpft. Das verführt uns zu Auffassungen, die auch die Widersprüche verdrängen, obwohl diese in jedem verankert sind, und uns leider allzu oft zu Fanatikern für eine Wahrheit prädestinieren kann.

Aber die Wahrheit ist nicht alles, was unsere Welt ausmacht, die Wahrheit ist mehr als ihre Beweise, auch wenn unsere Beweise exakte Grenzen bestimmen können, so bleiben sie doch unvollständig. Die Welt besteht aus mehr als der Wahrheit. Unser Tun hat stets Folgen, nur diese sind nicht immer absehbar, manchmal kann eine gute Absicht etwas Verheerendes schaffen und umgekehrt, denn auch der Zufall fordert sein Recht.

Wer die Welt für von uns errettbar oder zerstörbar hält, denkt, sie auch beherrschen zu können.

In unserem tiefsten Inneren wissen wir, dass wir eigentlich genau dies nicht können. Noch nicht einmal uns selbst vermögen wir vollständig zu beherrschen. Aber wir sind in der Lage, uns bewusst unserer eigenen Weisheit anzunähern, die der grundlegende Baustein unserer Existenz ist. Selbsterkenntnis und somit Selbstbestimmung bringen uns dazu, Verantwortung zu übernehmen. Verhandlung mit Augenmaß auf der kommunikativen Ebene lassen uns einen lebenswerten Konsens schaffen, eine tragfeste Aufrichtigkeit des Verstehens.

Schwarz-Weiß-Denken ist das Gegenteil von Verstehen. Auch wenn das Verstehen manchmal schwer fällt, so geleitet es uns über den Abgrund der Vergeblichkeit.

Das Mond Iapetus ist kalt und leblos und die Erde in ihrer Vielfalt und Schönheit ein pulsierender, lebendiger Himmelskörper. Der Titan Iapetos ist im Schattenreich eingekerkert. Wir aber wollen nicht in einem Reich leben, in dem uns unsere Schablonen unser Dasein verdunkeln. Und Iapetos brachte uns durch seine Kinder das Feuer, die Zivilisation, das Scheitern, die Verzweiflung, die Anmaßung, die Stabilität, die Geistesbildung, den Schmerz und die Hoffnung.

Das Iapetus-Prinzip aber macht uns blind, schuldig und verloren. Wir träumen doch auch in Farbe.

]]> http://thoughtbroker.wordpress.com/?p=12 Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:39:07 +0000 thoughtbroker http://thoughtbroker.wordpress.com/?p=12 The following is the talk given by Paul Comrie-Thomson at the Supper Club on 8 July:

Flying in from Melbourne a couple of weeks back I noticed an advertisement in the Sydney terminal for the Toyota Prius, “Guilt Free Driving” it said.

Three words that say it all. Because although journalists and our elected leaders love to use the two word mantra “the science” when talking about Global Warming, under the surface of this “science” talk there is – I will argue – a chthonian goo of guilt, shame and what was called in the olden days “sin”.

This was addressed On ABC 1’s ‘Insiders’ on Sunday. Chris Uhlmann said this, “as a former seminarian…one of things that strikes me most strongly about this debate is its theological nature – and that’s essentially that we have sinned against the environment, that we are now being punished and that the only way we can escape that punishment is to wear a hair shirt for the rest of our lives…”.

Right on Brother Uhlmann!

Central to the debate is an underlying faith commitment to a belief in eternal damnation or in Garnaut’s words “diabolical consequences”. This is rarely interrogated. And it begs the question, “Why do so many want to believe that the End in nigh?”

Why do activists work themselves into a state of pre-orgasmic tumescence about long-range weather forecasts?

Why do so many feel so good about feeling so bad?

And there is a lot of this feeling about. After the UK floods of 2007 it was written:
"The drumbeat of disaster that heralds global warming quickened its tempo this week; some parts of Britain had a sixth of their annual rainfall in 12 hours…. It has all been foreseen, and for far too long.’
Which prompted the British sociologist Frank Furedi to query, "Foreseen where? In the Book of Revelations?”

There is a similar tone in Ross Garnaut’s reading the last rites for the Murray Darling last Friday at the National Press Club. Here was the cradle of Australian civilization – home of cricketers, politicians and fruit and veg. It will all be gone, unless …unless what?

The Brits were on to this before Ross.

Consider what the Rt. Rev Graham Dow, Bishop of Carlisle, said in response to the London floods: "We are reaping the consequences of our moral degradation, as well as the environmental damage that we have caused."

Secular journalists were keen to beat the Rt. Rev.’s drum, Jeremy Leggett writing in the Guardian, 27 June 2007 said of the London floods, "Behind the gathering clouds the hand of God is busy, writing more bills [for mankind]".

To put this fervor, if not frenzy, into perspective how would we Australians have responded to clerics and journalists telling us that the Federation drought, the Maitland floods or any other adverse weather event prior to 1990 was God’s punishment for our sins?

It seems the Old Testament narrative about Noah and the Flood is being given a new twist. But then it’s not that new, Apocalyptic thinking – driven in America by Evangelical faith – has been co-opted before. Here’s James Baldwin in 1963:

"And here we are, at the center of the arc, trapped in the gaudiest, most valuable, and most improbable water wheel the world has ever seen ... If we [whites and blacks] do not falter in our duty now, we may be able, handful that we are, to end the [racial] nightmare, and achieve our country, and change the history of the world. If we do not now dare everything, the fulfillment of that prophecy, re-created from the Bible in song by a slave, is upon us:

God gave Noah the rainbow sign, No more water, the fire next time!"

Maybe Ross has been reading his Bible. There are 'diabolical' consequences he says. So are we talking about the Devil, the Great Satanic Polluter? Unless we are saved the consequences are more burned land, no Great Barrier Reef, no Kakadu wetlands: “No more water, the fire next time!”

Our rhetoric is becoming very American. In the Australian Catholic Church of old we often prayed for rain. But we were never told drought was our fault.

But it may be objected that yesterday’s religion is as irrelevant as yesterday’s CO2 emissions.
What is relevant now – we are told – is that 'the science' tells us that we are facing a crisis that the world has never, ever faced before. But scientific enquiry doesn’t take place in a vacuum. Neither do thoughts about guilt and retribution.

Aristotle wrote centuries ago – “nature abhors a vacuum”.

And to summarise this talk in four words I am arguing: Guilt abhors a vacuum.

In Old Time Religion we felt guilty about sins; usually of a sexual nature. But no one talks about 'sin' much nowadays. Why do we feel so guilty about weather predictions? Why are we embracing a secular version of the Apocalypse? The vacuum had to be filled.

How do we get rid of our guilt? Well buy a Toyota Prius and join SMH readers and celebrate a secular variant of the sacrament of Benediction: turn the lights off; turn all appliances off ‘standby’. Gather in a circle and worship ourselves as we gaze at the moon, unpolluted by streetlights. We’re together, we’re pure. It feels good. And we have assuaged our guilt.

We can do all this nonsense. Or we can read Bjorn Lomborg.

Some years ago, Bjorn Lomborg, a young Danish statistician, published a book called The Sceptical Environmentalist. It became a bestseller and generated a lot of heat. Lomborg was attacked and abused not because he denied the fact of global warming, in fact, he affirmed it. But because, on his analysis, a lot of deviousness was contained in the details presented concerning the size of the problem and what were the most responsible steps to take in the face of global warming.

He didn’t deny the problem. He denied Armageddon. And the faithful stoned him.

Since then the attacks have increased but so has the recognition of his contribution. Bjorn Lomborg was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time magazine in 2004, and he was named the 14th most influential academic in the world by Foreign Policy and Prospect magazine in 2005. His most recent book is entitled Cool It: The Sceptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming.

The following is based on a Counterpoint interview. It’s on the website.

So what does he say about Al Gore? Notice the tone of his language.

Al Gore should definitely be applauded for, for instance, taking a lot of the American rightwing away from the ‘oh it’s all a hoax, it's a left-wing conspiracy to raise taxes’ kind of thing. It's no such thing; climate change is real. But I think in doing so he’s also taken us much to the other side of saying ‘it’s imminent, doom, mankind’s last year, we have ten years to avert a major catastrophe’ kind of thing. It’s neither that. It’s not a hoax but it’s not a catastrophe either.

But what does Al Gore say about Bjorn Lomborg?

When Lomborg was mentioned in a BBC interview Al Gore had a hissy fit. He damned him as an ‘outlier’ and asked, with great indignation, why would an organisation like the BBC even introduce this man’s thoughts into what had been – up to that point – an intelligent interview – with Al Gore.

We will return to Al Gore later.

But what does the mild-mannered Dane say about Kyoto? This interview was conducted before the Bali conference.

Basically most people think that the Kyoto protocol at least would do a fair bit against climate change, but actually, Lomborg says, if everybody signs up it will have postponed global warming by seven days at the end of the century. Even if we had postponed the treaty indefinitely throughout the 21st century it would still only have postponed global warming by five years at the end of the century, and this at a cost of about $US180 billion every year.

What the mild-mannered Dane is saying is that there are smart ways and dumb ways to respond to climate change.

What about floods in Europe?

When Dresden, for instance, was flooded in 2002 (famously in Europe there were lots of floods that year), Chancellor Schroeder from Germany came down to the citizens of Dresden who had just lost all their houses and said to them, ‘This shows we need to do the Kyoto protocol.’ But what I think is amazing [Lomborg commented] is that this man was actually telling them...even if you grant him all the background arguments, he was telling them, ‘We will ensure to spend billions or even trillions of dollars to make sure that your houses will get flooded, more and more but slightly less more and more,’ instead of actually addressing those very real political issues of saying that maybe we should recreate wetlands, maybe we should stop building on flood plains and then we could actually make sure that your kids will get less flooded in just ten years.

But what about rising sea levels and our Pacific neighbors?

It’s important to say that sea levels will rise [Lomborg says] and that will be a problem, but we also have to have a sense of proportion. The central estimate, the UN climate panel, the thousands of experts tell us that sea levels will probably rise somewhere between half and two feet, with a centralised average of about a foot. But the curious thing is that people don’t realise that over the last 150 years sea levels also rose about a foot, yet I would argue that most people didn’t really notice, it was not a civilisation-changing event.

If you ask a very old person who lived through most of the 20th century, ask her what were the important things that happened there, she'll likely talk about the two World Wars, the suffrage for women, maybe even the IT revolution, but she will not mentioned, ‘oh, and sea levels rose’.
What does Al Gore say about sea levels?

What is often heard as, for instance, the Al Gore [assertion that sea levels will rise by 20 feet] a pronouncement of that sort, those are the truly staggering accounts but of course entirely unwarranted from the current UN climate panel reports. So again, we need to be careful [Lomborg cautions] about how we brandish the arguments of truly scary and overwhelming scenarios. It’s true that they’re out there but they’re typically fashioned by people who want us to get scared and do something. They’re not consistent with what we actually see from the UN climate panel. It’s unlikely that we’re going to make good policy judgments if we’re just scared witless.

I’m simply proposing [Lomborg concludes] that we increase research and development in non carbon-emitting energy technologies tenfold, and it would still be ten times cheaper than Kyoto. This is something we can do, this is politically feasible, it would have a much greater impact and also be much cheaper. Let’s, for God’s sake, actually choose stuff that works.

Summarising Lomborg in two words: Don’t panic.

And what does Nigel Lawson say? Nigel Lawson served in the Thatcher government from 1979 to 1989 as Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Secretary of State for Energy and, from 1983, Chancellor of the Exchequer. He entered the House of Lords in 2002 and is a member of the Lords’ Select Committee on Economic Affairs, which in 2005 produced a substantial report on ‘The Economics of Climate Change’.

He is far less generous than Lomborg is to the IPCC.

In his book ‘An Appeal to Reason – a cool look at Global Warming’ he notes that the 2007 IPCC report states we can expect a warming between now and the year 2100 of between 1.8 C (3.2F) and 4 C (7.2F).

But he issues the following caveats. Sir John Houghton, a former Chief Executive of the Scientific Working Group of the IPCC has said, “when you put models together which are climate models added to impact models added to economic models, then you have to be very wary indeed of the answers you are getting and how realistic they are”.

And what of Dr. Kevin Trenberth, one of the principal authors of the scientific section of the 2007 report who says this: “None of the models used by the IPCC are initialised to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed climate.”

And further, he says, “There are no predictions by the IPCC at all. And there never have been. The IPCC instead proffers ‘what if’ projections of future climate that correspond to certain emission scenarios. There are a number of assumptions that go into these emissions scenarios. They are intended to cover a range of possible self-consistent ‘story lines’”.

To which Lord Lawson comments, ‘story lines eh’ “Well well.”

Bringing it closer to home here is a further comment on story lines from Aynsley Kellow, Professor and Head, School of Government, University of Tasmania from his book ‘Science and Public Policy – the virtuous corruption of virtual environmental science:

“Whereas the Second Assessment Report of the IPCC had ‘projected’ an increase of between 0.9 and 3.5ºC by 2100 the Third Assessment Report raised this to 1.4 to 5.8ºC. This result reflected not new science (which accounted for only 4 percent of the change) but the effect of new ‘storylines’ provided by the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios.

This figure of 5.8ºC was then frequently rounded up to ‘6 degrees’ by the political boosters of the Kyoto Protocol and dressed up as a forecast, with no indication given of the virtual nature of the number being generated by inherently uncertain General Circulation Models on the basis of equally uncertain (indeed erroneous) emissions scenarios.”

Summarising Kellow in two words: Dodgy Science. And it should be noted that Aynsley Kellow participated in the IPCC process (he was a referee for Chapter 19 in an IPCC report, which covered ‘Key Vulnerabilities and Risk Assessment’).

But Kellow is on the public record that he is exasperated by the way in which critical responses to chapters are dealt with.

[He has noted the criticisms he made to the IPCC about the way in which negative effects are overstated and the ability to adapt is understated. Yet he says: ‘I’m not holding my breath for this criticism to be taken on board, which underscores a fault in the whole peer review process for the IPCC: there is no chance of a chapter [of the IPCC report] ever being rejected for publication, no matter how flawed it might be.’”]

Dodgy Science, or in Lord Lawson’s words, “Reliable prediction is impossible.”

Lawson concludes his study by saying that doing nothing is better than doing something stupid.
But what should be done in the face of the IPCC storylines? What if we want to accept the cautious approach?

What if we are in the position of a Sir Humphrey confronted by a Prime Minister who says, “Humphrey the sky is falling what are we going to do?” Well Prime Minister…

First, “monitor as accurately as we can, and without preconceptions, what is happening to temperatures around the globe”.

Second, accept that “a nation which achieves a technological breakthrough in the areas of reduced-carbon and non-carbon sources of energy is likely to benefit competitively”.

Third, “overcome the irrational hostility to nuclear power”.

Fourth, “eliminate subsidies for carbon-based energy”.

Fifth “research and develop ‘geo-engineering’, for example Freeman Dyson proposes genetically-engineered carbon-eating trees”.

Sixth “introduce a carbon tax provided that the proceeds are fully returned to taxpayers by a reduction in other taxes”. This is in harmony with the proposals of ANU Economist Warwick McKibbin.

Lord Lawson concludes (with perhaps, thoughts of Sir Humphrey in mind):

“If the spirit of the age – the zeitgeist – demands that something be done, if only as a gesture, to curb CO2 emissions, then a carbon tax imposed on a strictly revenue-neutral basis would do no great harm.”

What is driving the zeitgeist?

Lawson – and many others – say this is because “green is the new red”. And contra to Marx, Greens do not believe in the future; they worship a mythical pre-materialist and pre-capitalist past. Some would call this a pre-Judeao Christian Paganism complete with the worship of trees and the ritual sacrifice of ‘the carbon eating other’.

It is instructive to note, Lawson writes, that eco-fundamentalism and global warming absolutism have sprouted where traditional religions have the weakest hold – secular Europe. Lawson calls it “a convenient religion”.

But let us pause to reflect.

Guilt, anxiety, the yearning for meaning, the “I want to believe” of the millions of X-Files fans in the West are nothing new. William James in ‘The Varieties of Religious Experience’ saw it all coming. As James wrote:

“In order to usefully interpret the realm of common, shared experience and history, we must each make certain ‘over-beliefs’ in things which, while they cannot be proven on the basis of experience, help us to live fuller and better lives.”

So what can we do now to feel better?

Now the cry is to gird our loins, embrace depravation, join together to fight the evil air and deadly fire and those that emit them in order to save the earth and the water.

We are going to kill the polluting Sky God and embrace Gaia.

We’re doing it for Mother!

Interesting is it not that the four elementals: earth, air, fire and water are involved in this cosmic drama.

Also fascinating is that “the three religions of the Book” posit a Sky God. Paganism worships an Earth Mother.

A question to ponder: why do we want to go back?

A final word from the IPCC is called for. At the opening session of the Climate Change Treaty Negotiations in Bali Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change said that fossil fuels such as coal and oil are “here to stay and will continue to be drivers of growth”. Mr. de Boer also said that over the next 20 years world demand for coal would increase by 70 percent, with most of that need coming from the developing economies of China and India.

That doesn’t sound like five minutes to midnight to me. Don’t panic yet!

As for the future, those who choose to genuflect before an icon of Gaia will do so. Others will innovate, mediate, adapt and – maybe – make their fortunes developing new sources of energy. Making a quid from the zeitgeist? Well there’s nothing wrong with that!

And what does Rupert Murdoch say? The editorial in today’s Australian says,
“ONE of the truisms that climate change sceptics need to come to terms with is that the world will, at some point, run out of fossil fuels anyway. This is good reason enough to begin the search for an alternative foundation for the industrial world's shared economy. A replacement for oil, in particular, would have an added dividend in breaking the world’s dependence on the volatile Middle East.”

So is this really all about religion being used in the interest of geopolitics; this time around for ‘energy security’.

Well, as the Good Book says, “there is nothing new under the sun”.

Men in black … the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, Kevin Rudd, and the EU President, Jose Barroso.
Photo: Andrew Taylor

Why should anyone be surprised that Both India and China refuse to buy in to the Warminist conspiracy? They do not have a prominent religious cult driving the debate on climate change like we do here. Just when are the true believers in AGW going to admit that even if their predictions and their proposed panacea were spot on that there is not the global political will to administer their prescription?

It seems to me that these mendicants for Gaia are all about forcing their constituents into a frenzy of self flagellation rather than just admitting that we shall all have to adapt to what ever changes may (or may not) come rather than pretending that we humble human beings can wilfully mould the climate to suit our vision of an ideal?

Cheers Comrades

8)

Psst - das hier oben drüber ist ein Foto - also nicht wundern wieso ihr beim Draufklicken nicht das Video sehen könnt ;-)    Notice: here above is a picture taken from the Festival Movie 'Going to the Spirit of Woodstock Festival'

Hier also 'Frisch gepflückt' vom Michel Montecrossa Newsletter die Vorstellung seiner 'Next Generation' Konzertreihe, die er auf dem diesjährigen 'Spirit of Woodstock Festival 2008' vorstellen wird und die das Thema seiner 'Peace & Climate Change Concert Tour' weiter ausbauen wird.

Well, sizzling hot new infos spotted at Michel Montecrossa's Newsletter:

MICHEL MONTECROSSA ABOUT HIS 10 DAYS 'NEXT GENERATION' CONCERTS AT THE 'Spirit of Woodstock Festival 2008' IN MIRAPURI:
"At the Spirit of Woodstock Festival 2008 in Mirapuri me and my band perform our 10 days 'Next Generation' concert series. During these concerts we present topical songs dealing with the life on our rapidly changing earth and the impact these changes have on the next generation.
We all have to face times when we can no longer switch back the clock or overlook the facts that give an new meaning and reality to our life.
We have to adapt quickly to the existential problems of risin' food-, energy- and housing-prices, dwindling natural resources, energy wars, growing pollution, deterioration of human values, work, wages and education along with globale climate change.
The next generation will live in a future world that will be as good as is our present goodwill, understanding, awareness and consciousness.
The 'Next Generation' concerts turn to this future with high-energy songs and lyrics that put right what went wrong, make you listen and make you think."

Men in black … the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, Kevin Rudd, and the EU President, Jose Barroso.
Photo: Andrew Taylor

Why should anyone be surprised that Both India and China refuse to buy in to the Warminist conspiracy? They do not have a prominent religious cult driving the debate on climate change like we do here. Just when are  the true believers in AGW going to admit that even if their predictions and their proposed panacea  were spot on that there is not the global political will to administer their prescription?

It seems to me that these mendicants for Gaia are all about forcing their constituents into a frenzy of self flagellation rather than just admitting that we shall all have to adapt to what ever changes may (or may not) come  rather than pretending that we humble human beings can wilfully mould the climate to suit our vision of an ideal?

Cheers Comrades

8)

So i registered, became a member, uploaded some stuff, and slowly interacted with the members and various groups there.

And this is where i found this really, really awesome group called Gaia: The Living Planet. At first i thought it was just a group but later on found out that it was actually a competition group wherein works that are submitted ought to revolve around the theme, guess what, yeah, Gaia: The Living Planet and at the end of the competition period, a selection of works shall be featured on an internationally marketed book by the same name.

To my surprise! surprise!, i got an email from them a couple of weeks ago and told me that one of my submitted works was chosen to be featured in the book! YES! My humble work will be printed in one of the glossy pages of this collection alongside some of the world's best artists in photography, digital art, and traditional art! Imagine that! My unknown name will be there printed in all its glory, permanently stamped into eternity! Imagine the joy i felt! Imagine the excitement i am feeling now as i eagerly await for my copy of the book! This is a WOW moment for me. WOW!

Below is my work that is featured, printed, and showcased in the book Gaia: The Living Planet:

And please if you have an extra, please buy my art there, it would help me a lot in funding for a Macbook which i am so so so needing to purchase.

In a letter dated July 6 in response to questions from the chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.), Mr. Burnett said Mr. Cheney's office and the White House Council on Environmental Quality "were seeking deletions" last fall to congressional testimony about climate change prepared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Mr. Burnett said the latter office asked him "to work with CDC" to remove from the testimony "any discussion of the human health consequences of climate change." [Emphasis mine - ed.]

The issue of whether greenhouse gases endanger public health or welfare is significant because a finding by the EPA that they do would require the agency to regulate them under the terms of the federal Clean Air Act, spurring new rules across a range of industries.

A coal-rich state, Pennsylvania emits one percent of the world’s greenhouse gases responsible for global warming, more than the emissions of 105 developing countries combined.

While Pennsylvania is a big contributor to global warming, the legislation passed today creates opportunities for the state to be part of the solution.

Hope it's not anytime soon :D

Thank you Item Norm!

Estamos en el sexto día de campamento y todos nos lo estamos pasando muy bien.

Hemos hecho un montón de actividades desde la última entrada que hicieron nuestros compañeros del grupo Desiertos. Hoy nosotros,el grupo Océanos, queremos contaros nuestras sensaciones al contactar con Gaia en el río y por la vía verde que va hacia el pueblo de Olot.

“En la excursión por el río tuvimos que pasar por un puente “mono”. A continuación nos explicaron algunas curiosidades sobre las plantas y animales de la zona y para llegar a la mini-tirolina tuvimos que caminar por el cauce del riachuelo que formaba pequeñas pozas en las que aprovechamos para darnos un chapuzón .¡Fue muy divertido!”

“Ayer fuimos a una marcha desde Mas Franc a Olot. Un grupo fuimos en bici y otro andando, fueron 15 Km de ida y otros 15 de vuelta.

Olot es una ciudad muy bonita, en ella comimos y como coincidía con el día 5 aprovechamos para llamar a nuestros padres”.

“Coincidimos con dos guardianes de Gaia (grupo ecologista de la zona) que nos explicaron todo lo que estaban haciendo por ella”.

“Nos cansamos mucho pero mereció la pena”.

“Cuando llegamos al Mas Franch nos esperaba una buena ducha y luego una peli: “Tierra” que disfrutamos sobre nuestros sacos y esterillas acompañados de palomitas”.

Un “kiss” para todos los visitantes del blog

¡ABUYUYU!

]]> http://navigatore.wordpress.com/?p=8 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:45:04 +0000 navigatore http://navigatore.wordpress.com/?p=8

Gaia a immaginazione?

Esplora una prospetiva che spinge la immaginazione, mentre che noi veddiamo una connesione tra  technologia,  comunicazione globale,  e la esperienza umana. Noi immaginiamo che il pianeta e un organismo vivente, che riflette sulla propria essistensa e il suo ruolo nel universo. Guarderemo e identificceremo un grande  spostamento di  cosciensa che sta succedendo a questo momento! Cose questo  grande sentimento di momentum che sta accadendo su un livello globale? Riusciamo a sentirlo. Il pianeta e come un gigantye addormentato  che si sposta nel sonno?  Il pianeta si sta sveglaindo!

Come imagina gaia?

L’umanita a appena girato pagina nella storia della evoluzione  mentre che entriamo nel 21 esimo secolo. La nostra technologia sta crescendo  a una velocita enorme e la nostra comunita globale sta cominciando a sentirsi piu vicini.  Quando guardiamo alla technologiua mondiale, che una cosa in particolare che viene alla superfice. L’abilita del umanita di condividere le sue culture, atraverso la musica, larte, entratenimento  e I film. pensando a cinquant anni fa intrambi sono spostati anni luce in avanti. E possibile che la nostra arte, musica  filosofia, e anche I film sono l’immaginazione del pianeta?

Per certe persone, A primo sguardo il concetto puo sembrare logico e pure ordinario. Ma per altri che qualcosa piu profondo che questa osservazione base. Molti di noi sentono il movimento sotto la superfice. Una corrente profonda sotto la superfice sconbussola il nostro tempo. Qualcosa che sembra come ci sara un grande cambiamento sta per accaddere che e cosi monumentale che non riusciamo a afferarlo.  Sappiamo che e li ma come facciamo a identificare cose?

La nostra logica ci dice che I cambiamenti in technologia stanno portando a una accumulatioze di eventi. Pensiamo a esplorare lo spazio, oppure technologia che cambia il mondo. La verita e che la technologia cambia in continuo il mondo.

Ma la revalazione piu profonda e nella domanda perche esiste la technolgia? E ovio che la communicazione di tutti intorno il mondo e un paradossa su livelli subordinati. Il fatto semplice che ci sono billioni di messagi sms, messaggi instantanei, e messagi voce che spargono intorno al globo, tutto che succeed allo stesso tempo e infatti sorprendente!  Questa communicazione e simile al pensiero del cervello umano come billioni di segnali sparono in un istante da neurone a neurone  mandando e ricevendo informazione tutto in un nanosecondo!

E dificile immaginare che il pianeta e un organismo vivente, colletendo esperiense e avendo pensiero riflettivo? Se la nostra technologia e simile a ativita celebrale per il pianeta, allora cose il mechanismo dietro musica arte film, intratenimento, e filosofia. Puo essere limagginazione di un essere che e vastamente piu grande?  Se umani son oil sistema nervoso centrale del pianeta, allora il nostro pensiero colletivo e riflesso interno su una scala macro puo essere il pianeta pensando e riflettendo sulla sua essistensa. Semplicemente come noi riflettiamo, lo fa anche il pianeta.

Mai nella storia del pianeta a u8n ragazzo da Cairo potuto leggere della filosofia dei Nietzsche, oppure guardare un film come il matrix, tutto dal suo computer nella sua camera, e poi creare un video U Tube  dove parle di entrambi. Puo ascoltare una cansone che parla della connesione umana e poi mandarla a un amico in japone. Se noi prendiamo un passo indietro dallla nostra prospetiva normale, vedremo un sguardo micro nelle riflessioni del ora. Vedremo anche un macro sguardo alle riflesioni del pianeta,  le riflessioni di un essere che si sta evolvendo. Un oprganismo vivente!

Noi condividiamo idea e concetti che viagiano atraverso onde e la internet alla stessa velocita che ilk nostro cervello  manda segniali a diversi punti nel nostro corpo. Ogni volt ache gente riflette atraverso il globo su qualsiasi cosa, del concetto di un film, a una novella fantastica, oppure una nuova cansone che parla dcella vita  e amore, e la prossima esperiensa umana, il pianeta su un livello macro sta riflettendo sulla sua essistensa e il suo ruolo nel universo. Ogni volta un nuovo movimento di arte, concetto filosofico o concetto di film comicia a circolare intorno al mondo. La immaginazione del pianeta comincia a crescere e espandere.

Tutti noi come una specie abbiamo riflettuto sulla nostra essistensa, e il nostro ruolo, dal inizio di umanita. Ma e solo in questa nuova era dove labilita di riflettere come una cominita globale sta arrivando a livelli straordinari di connetivita e fluidita. Forse questa e la grande sotto corrente che noi sentiamo istintualmente? Forse questa e parte di un grande risveglio per il essere in cui viviamo, contribuendo i nostri riflessi, i nostri amori, le nostre perdite e le nostre vincite? Il pianeta si sta svegliando?

What kind o.o? Well you'll see in my next post ^^;

Ok, so I decided to make a community guild on Gaia Online, get my forums active -, write some charapters of my dream book I wish to write for years xD, make a new online story o_o! Last Snow is ... kinda ... Last Snow without any meaning ^^;

By the way I'll be on the sea side in 10 days for 3-4 days.

In meaning: I SHALL BECOME THE KING OF THE WORLD WHAHAHAHAHA BUAHAHAHAA ( Right ... )

--------------------------------------

DivinelySweetAddictInsaneDoll@hotmail.com

Sugared - Gallery, LolliRuriKiki City, KikiLuffMii, Divinely, Gaia

-------------------------------------

SweetAddict

Wikipedia.com

La hipótesis o Teoría de Gaia es un conjunto de modelos científicos de la biosfera en el cual se postula que la vida fomenta y mantiene unas condiciones adecuadas para sí misma, afectando al entorno. Según la hipótesis de Gaia la atmósfera y la parte superficial del planeta Tierra se comportan como un todo coherente donde la vida, su componente característico, se encarga de autorregular sus condiciones esenciales tales como la temperatura, composición química y salinidad en el caso de los océanos. Gaia se comportaría como un sistema auto-regulador (que tiende al equilibrio). La teoría fue ideada por el químico James Lovelock en 1969 (aunque publicada en 1979) siendo apoyada y extendida por la bióloga Lynn Margulis. Lovelock estaba trabajando en ella cuando se lo comentó al escritor William Golding, fue éste quien le sugirió que la denominase “Gaia”, diosa griega de la Tierra (Gaia, Gea o Gaya).

Quienes son afortunados...como yo, sabran a lo que me refiero cuando decimos la "gaia", ó, el alma de la tierra...Si, conocés la serie Final Fantasy, sabes de lo que hablo, si no...es un buen momento para entrar en su universo.

Sanyo, humanizando sus aparatos, bajó la idea de "Gaia" a los mismos, me parece una movida muy interesante...y muy nipona.

There are people with their old bags inside other bags, they might be mistaken for bags ladies. Well in every major city there are women who are mentally challenged who are going around collecting goods in plastic bags and a trolley. Now the environmental movement is making us all bag ladies and that cannot be right.

There are people who are always ready to feel guilt over nothing and they have a need to save the world and taking your rubbish to the recycling dump makes you feel better about themselves. In the same way Catholics feel they have done something worth while one they have gone to the confessional and paid penitence and they can go ahead and commit sins until the next confessional.

People do not understand that the environmental is very close to religious fervor, if you understand the new age religions you will know that there are people who are worshipping mother earth or gaia. Recycling is getting the most people to worship mother earth without knowing it. Do you know that the church of England has stopped preaching the bible and are now into global warming scare-mongering. If a church which specialises in boring its congregants to the early grave is now involved in saving the earth you know that something is amiss.

Not to blow your bubble but there are a number of premises which are mistaken about Global warming.

1) It is not true.

2) The world has always had periods of warming followed by cooling, but global warming scares is that this pattern will be broken and they have extrapolated infernite warming.

3) In the fiftes they worried about global freezing.

4) Do you remember the whole in the ozone layer scare? Funny, that we have not heard about that fraud for a little whie.

5) Even if there was global warming, can governments stop it? Look at every governent scheme, it always goes over budget and fails to achieve its goal. Government should be the last agency to carry out this project, look at your local municipality if you have any doubts.

6) The government will want you to watch your energy consumption and that is what we call environmental communism.

Do you want to test whether the environmental is now a religion, go and show a Jehovah's witness how his beliefs are not biblical and notice the anger you will generate. Now repeat the same experience with a serial recycler, wow! you saw the same reaction.