... the incomparable Lena Horne. This song was done superbly well by others, including the equally incomparable Ella Fitzgerald, but Lena's take will always be my favorite.
Anyway, not to digress too far off the original intended topic -- the weather.
Extremely high winds today in Pennsylvania, my state. High winds in France. A tornado in Hawaii. Terrible heat and, hence, terrible wildfires in Australia. Heavy snow in Britain.
Global warming? Uh ... no.
But what is it? The climate certainly is changing. It has a way of doing that, every so often, throughout history. Why, and what does it mean just now to us? Got a few theories, me. I'm doing research on them, and will post again on this topic soon.
Sometimes, when I'm in the middle of an avalanche (if you'll pardon the expression) of bad news, I wonder if this is more the result of the changes in our ability to follow what's going on in our world, rather than something actually changing about our world.
If there's a bad storm in New Guinea, or Kamchatka, or Minnesota, we know about it, because we can get pictures and audio of it in all its fury, beamed directly to us through our modern media.
Even within the last century, that wasn't always the case. Take the world non-reaction to the 1908 Tunguska explosion, as an example; it took twenty years for even the Russians themselves to bestir themselves and investigate what happened. Today you'd probably have Geraldo Rivera reporting on the approaching meteor from a blimp intercepting its trajectory...
We have the ability to monitor the daily occurances upon our planet with greater scrutiny than ever before... maybe our change in perspective is influencing our perception of changing events.
Good point, about instant information. It probably DOES affect perception. And it probably leads to leaps to conclusions where they're not warranted.
(Conversely, instant information also allows us free-speech freaks to become more alert, sooner, to egregiosities on the part of the "HRCs." Which is a good thing.)
The climate IS changing, but not due to "carbon emissions." I'm in the process of examining a number of different threads, theory-wise, that all seem to lead to the same zero point; but I don't dare share until I've gotten it clear in my own mind. (As if it isn't occupied enough with other stuff, *grin!*)
Can I have some peace and quiet?
-
I am so tired of hearing politics, just let me sit here alone for a
few minutes;
No bashing or criticizing.
Just let me sit here and hear nothing.
...
Don’t panic! This blog has changed
-
My heart sinks. I have to master a new blogging system, and hope that it
works. You see, the new blog will show only one…
Can't keep the guns and the money
-
Looks like yesterday's meeting was just another failed attempt to break the
deadlock. The "agreement" the political leaders reached is practically
worth no...
On hiatus
-
I've run this blog for a long time. Especially by Internet standards. But,
as you may have noticed lately, I'm just not updating the site on a regular
basi...
The Lynch List, 09-Jul-2012
-
First: Equality of Opportunity is a much-abused buzz-statement. I have
argued in the past that this is a codeword for Equality of Outcome, and
been critici...
THINGS ARE MOVING - AGAIN
-
The WSJ’s Peggy Noonan checks US election numbers: The polls are tightening
and no one is sure why. A Reuters/Ipsos poll through…
3 comments:
Sometimes, when I'm in the middle of an avalanche (if you'll pardon the expression) of bad news, I wonder if this is more the result of the changes in our ability to follow what's going on in our world, rather than something actually changing about our world.
If there's a bad storm in New Guinea, or Kamchatka, or Minnesota, we know about it, because we can get pictures and audio of it in all its fury, beamed directly to us through our modern media.
Even within the last century, that wasn't always the case. Take the world non-reaction to the 1908 Tunguska explosion, as an example; it took twenty years for even the Russians themselves to bestir themselves and investigate what happened. Today you'd probably have Geraldo Rivera reporting on the approaching meteor from a blimp intercepting its trajectory...
We have the ability to monitor the daily occurances upon our planet with greater scrutiny than ever before... maybe our change in perspective is influencing our perception of changing events.
Oops, in my first sentence I meant to say, "when it feels like I'm in the middle of an avalanche..."
Ha ha! Good self-catch :)
Good point, about instant information. It probably DOES affect perception. And it probably leads to leaps to conclusions where they're not warranted.
(Conversely, instant information also allows us free-speech freaks to become more alert, sooner, to egregiosities on the part of the "HRCs." Which is a good thing.)
The climate IS changing, but not due to "carbon emissions." I'm in the process of examining a number of different threads, theory-wise, that all seem to lead to the same zero point; but I don't dare share until I've gotten it clear in my own mind. (As if it isn't occupied enough with other stuff, *grin!*)
Post a Comment