Burning fossil fuels is not the reason for global warming according to a new religious documentary—Noah’s flood is the reason.

Baumgardner notes that the Earth has experienced warming and cooling cycles several times since Noah’s Flood approximately 5,000 years ago. One such period was from AD 900 to AD 1300.

“During that time the Vikings colonized Greenland, and abundant farming, grasslands, herds, and even vineyards were present in Greenland,” he says. The “Little Ice Age” followed this warm period. In AD 1600, during this period, the Thames River in London froze.

With unmistakable evidence of significant variations in global temperature over the past 2,000 years, the current warming is “not out of range,” Baumgardner explains. “Current warming actually started in 1800 and accelerated during the 20th century, so now we’re about a degree warmer than we were 100 years ago.”

Perhaps Adam and Eve are the reason why al Qaeda hates the West?

(Nod: Carpetbagger Report)

…and they apparently store all your important files. A 2-gig USB drive, in a Lego brick:

How cool is that?! Order one here!

From the NYT:

Federal immigration authorities yesterday unveiled 100 new questions immigrants will have to study to pass a civics test to become naturalized American citizens.

That got me thinking. How many natural-born Americans could pass the test?

From 2006 using the old test in downtown Roanoke:

QUESTION #1: What do the stars on the flag represent?

Michelle McGee said, “The freedom… the freedom of… uhhhh.”

Melissa Richards answered, “Stars represent colonies. I don’t know.”

And after a few minutes of thinking, Bethany Gramm said, “Isn’t that the amount of the states?

There we go. Finally. Old Glory’s 50 stars do represent the 50 states of the Union.

Let’s stick with numbers for our second question.

QUESTION #2: How many senators are there?

Daniel Colton of Roanoke said, “50.” Carol Conway, also from Roanoke, said, “There’s two from each state. So that would be 102 or 104.”

Roanoker Anne Perrin came in a little lower, saying, “Uhhh. 45?”

Dina Daniels from Boones Mill didn’t even give it a guess. “I have no idea.” Shirley Wright did have a guess, although it was a little high, saying, “125… maybe.”

And the right answer is, given to us by Matt Wiram from Roanoke, is 100. There are two senators from each state.

And from Jay Leno several years back:

Think you can answer these questions? Test yourself here. Good luck with #19. That should be the only one you miss!

Here’s something from the world of the strange and, unfortunately, tragic:

A 14-year-old Lake Havasu boy has become the sixth victim to die nationwide this year of a microscopic organism that attacks the body through the nasal cavity, quickly eating its way to the brain.Aaron Evans died Sept. 17 of Naegleria fowleri, an organism doctors said he probably picked up a week before while swimming in the balmy shallows of Lake Havasu. [...]

The amoeba typically live in lake bottoms, grazing off algae and bacteria in the sediment. Beach [Michael Beach, a specialist in recreational water-born illnesses for the CDC] said people become infected when they wade through shallow water and stir up the bottom. If someone allows water to shoot up the nose—say, by doing a cannonball off a cliff—the amoeba can latch onto the person’s olfactory nerve.

The amoeba destroys tissue as it makes its way up to the brain.

People who are infected tend to complain of a stiff neck, headaches and fevers, Beach said. In the later stages, they’ll show signs of brain damage such as hallucinations and behavioral changes.

Once infected, most people have little chance of survival. Some drugs have been effective stopping the amoeba in lab experiments, but people who have been attacked rarely survive, Beach said.

“Usually, from initial exposure it’s fatal within two weeks,” Beach said.

More on Naegleria (nuh-GLEER-e-uh) at the CDC.

With all the cries of foul play and un-patriotism including a vote in the U.S. Senate to condemn the MoveOn.org Petraeus ad, there’s been very little congressional GOP outcry over two other incidents, one of which involved a sitting U.S. Representative and minority leader in the U.S. House.

First there was the CNN interview with Representative and Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio:

The investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop al Qaeda [in Iraq].

The “small price” to which he was referring, of course, is the over 3,800 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq and the over 27,000 wounded in Iraq, not to mention the soldiers who don’t see their families for months, the soldiers who have served multiple tours, the soldiers who don’t have adequate breaks between tours, and the soldiers who miss the births of their children. A small price indeed for those soldiers who make up those numbers and their family and friends who must deal with the consequences.

The second story not receiving any attention comes from Rush Limbaugh, the out-spoken conservative radio host. During a listener call-in, Limbaugh called U.S. soldiers who don’t support the Iraq war “phony soldiers.”

So Senate GOPers, why the hypocrisy? Why not fervent outcries over these two “unpatriotic” gaffes? “Do as I say, not as I do,” right? That certainly also explains why the senators who wanted the debate and vote on the MoveOn.org ad previously complained of wasting time on Democratic “empty resolutions.”

Designed by: Kyle Cooper
Year: 2002

Designed by: Kyle Cooper
Year: 2004

News came today of a special effects technician that was killed while working on a stunt sequence for the new Batman film.

Stuntmen and those who work supporting stunt sequences in movies deserve more credit from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Just as there should be an Oscar for Best Film Title Sequence, there should be an Oscar for Best Stunt Sequence.

Of all the crew who work on a film, who besides the stunt crew are willing to be severely injured or risk death for their art and the film? How many costume designers, make-up artists, or film composers risk their safety and well-being for their job? And how many films have crucial scenes involving stunts and would not be the same film without those sequences?

The last major push for inclusion in the Oscar ceremony came in 2005, but as was previously done since 1990, the Academy said no.

It is beyond time to recognize this hard-working, injury-suffering group of people with an Oscar.

Just a random musing here: Wendy’s commercials used to be wholesome and innocuous, usually staring founder Dave Thomas, such as this one:

With Dave Thomas’s passing, Wendy’s marketing has taken on a new, shall I say, flavor:

Now what would Dave Thomas think about that? My, how times have changed.

Two stories recently caught my attention and are worrisome to me. The first is the much-discussed MoveOn.org ad in the New York Times with the headline of “General Petraeus or General Betray Us.”

The second article is of a student editor at a university newspaper writing an editorial that said “Taser this: Fuck Bush.”

In both instances, the snide remarks are offensive and uncalled for when instead of lowering the level of debate in the country, we should be raising it. In both cases, the remarks slash the professionalism of both the activist group and the student editor.

But in both cases, First Amendment-guaranteed free speech was being exercised. And for the U.S. Senate to devote time to debate and vote on condemning MoveOn.org and for university officials to debate on action to take against the student are both very frightening. Yes, the remarks were made in poor judgment, but they remain an exercise of free speech.

I don’t like much of what Bill O’Rielly says at Fox, but he has a right to say what he wants to say. That is the freedom that is American and is worth protecting.

Constitutional law is being auctioned-off to the highest bidder—literally.

James Zemaitis, the director of Sotheby’s 20th-century design department, said he was asked to give up a room at Sotheby’s headquarters on York Avenue at East 72nd Street that he had reserved for a pre-auction exhibition of his own.”All they told me was: ‘David Redden is selling this really important document, the most important document of all. Can you give up this room for us?’ ” he recalled. “And I’m like, ‘Sure, but what is he selling, the Magna Carta?’ “

A second tunnel in less-than a week has been discovered under the border between Mexico and the U.S. This time, the surprising thing is that this tunnel was being built under a legal border crossing—literally right under the border patrol’s noses.

This, of course, isn’t the first tunnel:

More than 40 tunnels connecting towns in Mexico and the United States have been discovered by police since the September 11, 2001, attacks.

I still cannot understand why border security is not a higher priority on the U.S. Government’s to-do list. If we are so worried about terrorists “following us home,” then why can we not secure the border and ports? These tunnels’ primary purpose might have been to smuggle drugs, but who’s to say they can’t also smuggle terrorists or weapons? And how many more tunnels are out there? If the tunnel builders are ballsy enough to construct a tunnel under a border crossing, how many tunnels are built in less-patrolled areas? But then again, this was probably the last place the border patrol would look, right?

The president doesn’t want to give health insurance to an additional 4 million uninsured children, in addition to the already 6 million covered by the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

ThinkProgress links to an article that says $12.2 billion dollars would be needed to pay for insurance for these children. The kicker? The amount of money the U.S. spends in Iraq in only 41 days would fully fund the program.

And then there’s this article about the president not wanting to spend $22 billion on such frivolous things as “veterans health care, infrastructure improvements, education, and other domestic priorities.”

The $22 billion is only for the first year. With every passing year the number gets bigger and bigger, and so over the next five years the increase in federal spending would add up to $205 billion.

—President Bush

If the president is worried about spending an addition $200 billion, then why this:

President Bush plans to ask lawmakers next week to approve another massive spending measure—totaling nearly $200 billion—to fund the war through next year, Pentagon officials said.

There’s a real problem when we can’t spend money on domestic programs because it’s seen as excessive spending but we have an open wallet to the president’s train wreck Iraq policy. I suppose we can thank Congress for that, though.

Jerry Sanders, the Republican mayor of San Diego, who has a lesbian daughter, has reversed course and now supports gay marriage. Watch this incredibly moving announcement:

All I can think of while watching this is contrasting the father-of-a-lesbian Republican mayor’s heartfelt and poignant message with the less-than heartfelt messages of the father-of-a-lesbian Republican vice president.

Score one for reason, equality, and social justice.

(Nod: The DailyDish)

How fun, yet creepy, is this?

Bob Herbert at the New York Times has an editorial today discussing the proposed California initiative to split the state’s electoral votes by congressional district.

The proponents of the initiative understand completely that a constitutional crisis could damage the nation’s democratic process and undermine the legitimacy of a presidential election. In their view that’s preferable to a Republican defeat.

The interesting tidbit in the article is this:

Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and one of the nation’s pre-eminent constitutional scholars, believes the initiative is blatantly unconstitutional. “Entirely apart from the politics,” he said, “this clearly violates Article II of the Constitution, which very explicitly requires that the electors for president be selected ‘in such manner as the Legislature’ of the state directs.”

Yep. California voters can’t change how the state allocates electoral votes. The legislature has to. Here it is, Article II, Section I, of the U.S. Constitution:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress

This isn’t going to go away without a fight. Let’s hope reason and constitutionality win.

This Family Guy clip is loaded with humorous references, from Top Gun to airplane pilot and safety announcements to Star Wars to President Bush on September 11th. Check it out!

Today :-) turns 25.

Caution: Language at the very end may be offensive to some viewers.

Designed by: Laurent Brett, Specimen France
Year: 2005

A Ladies Home Journal article in 1900 made predictions for the future. One blog gives some commentary on our progress since the predictions.

(Nod: The Daily Dish)

Or at least he doesn’t care about their health. From the New York Times:

Senate and House negotiators said Sunday that they had agreed on a framework for a compromise bill that would provide health insurance to four million uninsured children while relaxing some of the limits on eligibility imposed by the Bush administration. [...] The compromise would allow states to cover nearly half of the children who are uninsured. About 6.6 million youngsters are now covered under the program.

The White House, though, has said it will veto the bill, out of concern the bill sends America down a path of government-run health care.

Really, so the Bush Administration is concerned granting health insurance to children is a threat to smaller government, but warrant-less wiretaps and spying on Americans is not a threat to the Constitution and Americans’ civil liberties and doesn’t send us on a path of big-brotherism?

And one side-note. Leave it to a politician to politicize children’s health:

If he vetoes the bill, it’s a political victory for us. Public opinion polls show strong support for expanding kids’ health coverage.

—Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus

The leading GOP presidential candidates skip debates centered around minorities and minority issues because of “scheduling conflicts.”

Three of the four leading Republican presidential candidates turned down invitations to a PBS debate this month at a historically black college in Baltimore, leading moderator Tavis Smiley on Thursday to accuse them of ignoring minority voters. [...] The Univision debate, co-sponsored by the University of Miami, was scheduled for Sept. 16, but canceled after only one candidate—McCain—accepted. “We’re looking for a new date,” said Univision spokeswoman Rosemary Mercedes. However, Romney and Giuliani already have declined.

(Nod: The Daily Dish)

Leave it to these goof balls to come up with the highlight of the evening:

And unlike the motion picture academy, the television academy awards best main title design. This year’s winner, “Dexter”:

And finally, what awards show can be complete without some controversy? This time it was censoring an anti-war message. It might have been because Sally Field used the word “god-damn,” but apparently that word is allowed to be said on TV.

Today the U.S. Constitution turns 220 years old. This document has weathered domestic strife, endured countless criticisms, and has undergone many recent interpretations and setbacks, but it has survived as a shining beacon of American ideals.

But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

—James Madison or Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers, No. 51

This past week, we had testimony from General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker as well as a national address from President Bush. Neither event left us with anything new—no new breakthroughs, no new ideas, no new substantive progress.

One thing new this week, though, was a survey released by ABC News, the BBC, and NHK of Japan. Some findings of the report:

More Iraqis say security in their local area has gotten worse in the last six months than say it’s gotten better, 31 percent to 24 percent, with the rest reporting no change. Far more, six in 10, say security in the country overall has worsened since the surge began, while just one in 10 sees improvement.

More directly assessing the surge itself—a measure that necessarily includes views of the United States, which are highly negative—65 to 70 percent of Iraqis say it’s worsened rather than improved security, political stability and the pace of redevelopment alike.

You can view the full story and download a PDF of the full survey results here. From the full results:

79% of Iraqis oppose the coalition’s presence:

Just under half say the coalition forces should withdrawal now, but far more shocking is the percentage of polled Iraqis that say attacks on U.S. forces are “acceptable.”

So Iraqis don’t support coalition forces being there, and a majority claims attacking those coalition forces is okay. How can we help people who don’t want us to help?

Even after four years occupying and rebuilding Iraq, electricity even for half the day is a precious commodity. In 2005, 41% had electricity for more than 8 hours in a day (from a 2005 ABC News survey):

Two years later, that number should be much higher, yes? Not the case, as only 48% have electricity for more than 8 hours a day:

Two years, and only 9% more have electricity for one-fourth of the day. Not even a full day. One-fourth. If this were in the U.S., it would be unacceptable.

Given these statistics and so many more in the survey, seeing progress in Iraq is difficult. These aren’t the political goals the Iraqi government were to meet, but even with those, failure apparently IS an option, as the GAO gives satisfactory progress on only 3 of 18.

So my question is: why are we still in Iraq? If the Iraqi people aren’t willing to let us help them, and the Iraqi government is not willing to help themselves, why are our troops supporting a country that its citizens cannot or will not support? In the middle of a civil war, why did the Iraqi parliament feel the need to take a month vacation last month? Did the U.S. government take a break during our civil war?

But a withdrawal is simply not that easy for two primary reasons. First, of course, is the question of what happens when we’re gone. Will the civil war escalate to unimaginable proportions? Will ethnic cleansing do the same? And can Iraqi security forces take over from the Americans and hold the security progress our troops have fought so hard for, or will those few secured areas fall back into strife?

But this last question begs a counterpoint: will the Iraqi security forces EVER be able to take over? And how long will it take for them to be ready? Will American forces, then, be necessary for hand-holding until the Iraqis are ready?

The second issue is oil. Oil has to be considered a major issue when discussing our strategy in Iraq. We in America, we in the world, must have oil. Until we can seriously devote ourselves to engineering a viable alternative fuel, we will depend on the Middle East region for our fuel source.

But how enormous of a security threat is our dependence on the Middle East to make this delivery if the region is engulfed in civil war and conflict? If we did not need the Middle East’s oil, how much attention would Americans give to the region? If they have nothing to give us, then we don’t need to care about them, right? At least that’s what Americans would likely think. Take Africa, for instance. How does Africa benefit the average American? And now, how much do we pay attention to the political, economic, and social conflicts in Africa? It’s a harsh but painful and unsettlingly unfortunate reality—they have nothing we need, so why should we pay attention to them? The Middle East, without its oil, would largely become the same situation. But someone may argue, without the world caring about the region, then the strife would continue, and perhaps ethnic cleansing on a large scale would continue. Two words for this person: Darfur and Rwanda.

Ethnic cleansing, though, is already happening in Iraq. The president claims sectarian violence is down, but that’s simply because there are fewer people to kill. If Sunnis aren’t displaced from primarily Shiite regions and Shiites displaced from primarily Sunni regions, then they’re being killed. The map below, from the 20-member military commission headed by retired Marine Gen. James Jones, illustrates the ethnic cleansing (PDF of his report). From July 2006 to July 2007, the tan areas on the map, indicating mixed-Muslim areas, are significantly reduced.

Ethnic cleansing is happening in Iraq RIGHT NOW, and it’s under OUR watch.

The entire unpredictability and uncertainty with the situation is why I on some levels question an immediate withdrawal. But at the same time, I cannot morally ask our troops to serve if I too am not in some way contributing to the war effort, something as big as enlisting to something as small as writing letters and emails or sending care packages to troops in Iraq. It is too easy to ask someone else to do something you don’t want to do yourself.

This issue of drawing a connection to the war effort is another failure of the Bush Administration. At no point during the last four years have Americans been asked or demanded to make some sort of large-scale contribution or sacrifice. The only Americans doing any large-scale contributing or sacrificing are those who either are serving or those who have family members serving. The Bush Administration has failed to make this an organized, American effort.

Failure has been ripe throughout the entire war thus far. From administration failures to Iraqi governmental failures, this war effort has been misguided and mismanaged from the beginning. There has been so little progress made on so many fronts, the question of why we are still there must be asked. And the question deserves a rational, sincere, and honest response.

If Democrats in Congress are serious about ending the war, they could vote tomorrow to cut-off funding for the war. Critics and the president may say they would only be hurting the troops by not providing the funding necessary for critical equipment the troops need. But the Democrats can come back and say the president has had four years now to give the troops all the equipment they’ve needed, and if they don’t have it yet, that’s not the Democrats’ fault.

The president has had four years to prove his plan. We’ve changed strategies, added more troops, set-up benchmarks, and still no substantive progress can be claimed. Our troops are sacrificing for what? It’s time we really do support our troops and bring them home. By this time next year, an overwhelming majority of troops should be redeployed out of Iraq. They have done and continue to do all we ask of them, and now it is time for us to do something for them.

(Nod: ThinkProgress)

Designed by: Danny Yount
Year: 2005