Grey Thoughts
Reality Debased Community Strikes Again
The fine folks over at Daily Kos show their great grasp of reality. In an online poll, 35% (as of 3:27pm est) of them would prefer Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to be in charge of America as opposed to George Bush.

All I can see is that these guys are completely deranged. If Iran's president had control of the US, Israel would be destroyed, all US citizens would be under Sharia Law, and Islam would be promoted by the sword to many many countries.

Perhaps those 35% should go live in Iran for 3 months and see just how wonderful living under Mahmoud really is.
Iraq, Oil and Money
Given Alan Greenspan's recent book proclaiming the Iraq war was all about the oil (which he later said was not the Governments motive), it is important to note just where the wealth of our richest is coming from.
In the first Forbes 400 [1982], oil was the source of 22.8 percent of the fortunes, manufacturing 15.3 percent, finance 9 percent, and technology 3 percent. By 2006 oil had fallen to 8.5 percent and manufacturing to 8.5 percent. Technology, however, had risen to 11.75 percent and finance to an extraordinary 24.5 percent.

"No war for finance" just isn't as catchy though.

(HT: Evangelical Outpost)
Methodological Naturalism
There has been a bit of talk about methodological naturalism (MN) around lately, with David Heddle and Joe Carter posting about it and I just wanted to bring a few things together...

David's definitions will suffice
Philosophical Naturalism: the belief that the natural world is all that there is.

Methodological Naturalism: the belief that the natural world is all that is accessible for scientific inquiry.

Joe makes the following claim
Conclusion: If God can be discerned from the evidence of creation, than the evidence of God is detectable by empirical observation and study of the natural world. The Christian must therefore completely reject philosophical naturalism. We might also conclude that methodological naturalism is flawed and a hindrance to science. Though the method may be adequate for some purposes, it is unnecessarily self-limiting and should be rejected.

This all makes sense, but many scientists claim that supernatural explanations (and class Intelligent Design as one) are also outside the scope of science, mostly arguing that supernatural causes can never be observed.

Let me make this very clear...this is a gigantic double standard....Craig Rusbult explains why
Can scientists logically infer the existence of things they cannot observe? Yes, if an unobservable cause produces observable effects. This cause-and-effect principle is used in operations science. For example, even though electrons and ideas cannot be observed, modern theories propose electrons (in chemistry) and ideas (in psychology). Why? Because our observations are explained in the most satisfactory way by theories proposing the existence of unobservable causes (electrons and ideas) that produce the effects we observe.
Similarly, in historical science we can logically infer the existence of causes we did not observe, if these unobserved causes produced effects we can observe. Therefore, when skeptics ask "Were you there? Did you see it?", they are ignoring the principle that scientific logic depends mainly on observable effects, not observable causes. Because of this principle, even if an event or process was not directly observed, a plausible scientific theory can propose that the event or process did occur.

So when someone excludes supernatural causes from science on the basis of that they cannot be observed, yet include the vast multitude of natural causes that cannot be observed as science, what they are really doing is practicing philosophical naturalism (PN).

This assumption of PN essentially means that science is no longer looking for the best explanation or 'the truth', but instead merely looking for the best naturalistic explanation. The once noble aim of science is reduced to an atheistic propaganda machine.
Climate Change Skepticism - Another Reason
Whilst the media repeatedly talks about the Arctic ice sheet melting (and it is!), the public is almost never told that the Antarctic ice is increasing in size. From the graphic at University of Illinois website 'The Cryosphere Today', the increasing trend can be seen. In fact, since the 1970s, it appears that the amount of ice has increased by 10%)

Considering that the Antarctic contains 90% of the worlds ice (yes, you read that correctly...90%), this is especially significant. (Note that Wikipedia says 90%, however, The Cryosphere Today lists the Arctic as containing 2.92 Million square and the Antarctic containing 16.26 million sq. km. However, this is surface area and not volume - The Antarctic ice has an average depth of 1.6km!)

So really, is the amount of ice actually decreasing or isn't it? I certainly seems like the increase in ice from the Antarctic is more than enough to offset the loss of ice from the Arctic....but that just isn't useful information if you are a scaremongering warmenist.

(HT: Hot Air)
Internet Power Shift - Global Warming
I mentioned the other day that the internet has shifted power to individuals because it has allowed them to form large communities of like minded people (over a distance).

Today, Climate Audit, run by Steve McIntyre has shown a second reason that the internet has shifted power to individuals.

Climate Audit has been pushing NASA and head climate scientist Hansen to release the source code used in determining the extent of global warming. Note that this release should have been done with the initial papers in 1999, as the scientific method requires disclosure of method so that findings can be replicated AND peer reviewed correctly (Note: lets just say that I doubt that many statisticians ever get to peer review scientific papers, even though statistics are vital to a lot of science).

Climate Audit brings the great news that NASA has released the source code (albeit, most of it seems to have been edited quite recently, ...the changes will probably never be verified, but I reckon it is probably just adding comments or removing comments that could be seen to be damaging to Hansen's objectivity).

This success shows that the internet allows people to publish and discuss issues at a very low cost of production, where as previously, only larger and better funded bodies could do so.
Internet Power Shift
This article outlines how online communities like Facebook have allowed and will allow groups of individuals to organise for causes and political goals.

It is just another example of the power shifts that the internet has wrought (with a shift away from media power being another), and a great reason to watch Google, as it seeks to control all things internet.
Slouching Towards Totalitarianism
The true agenda of the secular left is slowly revealing itself. Under the guise of freedom of choice, millions of babies every year are murdered in the womb. Yet when a womans 'reproductive freedom' (aka the right to murder for convenience) is touted as a universal right, the crawl towards a totalitarian government continues to gain momentum, showing just how real the secular left considers this 'right' to be.

In the UK the social work stupidity craze has shown that the government knows what is best for you and your yet to be born children. In this case, well... I'll let the article tell you
A pregnant woman has been told that her baby will be taken from her at birth because she is deemed capable of "emotional abuse", even though psychiatrists treating her say there is no evidence to suggest that she will harm her child in any way.
# Leader: Unnatural justice of secret courts
# More use of a vague reason to remove children

Social services' recommendation that the baby should be taken from Fran Lyon, a 22-year-old charity worker who has five A-levels and a degree in neuroscience, was based in part on a letter from a paediatrician she has never met.

Hexham children's services, part of Northumberland County Council, said the decision had been made because Miss Lyon was likely to suffer from Munchausen's Syndrome by proxy, a condition unproven by science in which a mother will make up an illness in her child, or harm it, to draw attention to herself.

Under the plan, a doctor will hand the newborn to a social worker, provided there are no medical complications. Social services' request for an emergency protection order - these are usually granted - will be heard in secret in the family court at Hexham magistrates on the same day.

From then on, anyone discussing the case, including Miss Lyon, will be deemed to be in contempt of the court.
When the government starts deciding who is fit to raise children, before they have done anything wrong, it is time to be afraid. Be very afraid.

Of is all for the 'good' of the baby.

Powered by Blogger Weblog Commenting and Trackback by