oh no! Celine Dion ends five-year Vegas stint

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7146839.stm

Singer Celine Dion has played her final show at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas after nearly five years of doing the same show 717 times.

...bugger!

the nonesense in bali

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7145608.stm
anyone who thinks that the headlines of:

The "Bali roadmap" initiates a two-year process of negotiations designed to agree a new set of emissions targets to replace those in the Kyoto Protocol.

will do anything dramatically meaningful is living in a dreamworld. scientists aren't calling for negotiations, they are calling for emissions cuts. period. mandatory cuts are the ONLY way we are ever going to do something about limiting carbon emissions in a serious way in the short term. it's a little like speeding in a car. why do you think we have speed limits that are enforced by the police? why don't we just ask everyone to slow down? you have to have some mechanism in place by which you enforce rules, regulations, laws, etc. or else those rules will simply not be observed. in other words, if you think you can get away with it, you will.

the united states, the world's biggest polluter had complained that language on reducing their emissions was too strong, and would commit them to measures that could retard their economic development. THAT'S THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT! you cannot keep cramming cake after cake into your fat mouth and not get fat as a result of your actions. global climate change isn't ONLY concerned about a farmer in iowa, or how he will vote.

in the end, the choice is simple. adopt a strategy and invest. give up a little now for rewards in the future or face the inevitable.

one more thing. how's that credit crisis looking, george? economic development-at-all-costs, just like everyone else's will have naturally occurring ups and downs irrespective of what you do to protect the planet. i understand that liquidity, the main driving force behind economic development is still sending shockwaves throughout the entire financial system. how many hundreds of thousands of homeowners will end up losing their homes as a result in part of their own greed and ignorance but also of this banking greed and" look the other way while we're making billions" lack of regulation during this administration, despite dire warnings that this nightmare could happen? they are the professionals. they knew better.

how could setting targets reducing carbon emissions possibly be any worse for these same homeowners?

surely it's time for the united states to stop being the biggest polluter, AND the biggest asshole on the planet.

well done al gore for saying what he did.

topdjgear.com

I have decided to remove this post and wish topdjgear all the success in the future.

Chimps beat humans in memory test

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7133357.stm

Bush 'cannot recall' CIA videos

The president "did not remember" being told of the tapes prior to Thursday, she said.

Flatulence ban for club pensioner

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/7126973.stm

A social club in Devon has banned a 77-year-old man from breaking wind while indoors.

Maurice Fox received a letter from Kirkham Street Sports and Social Club in Paignton asking him to consider his actions, which "disgusted" members.

"I am a loud farter, but there is no smell"

Maurice Fox

...yes, mate.

freezing the kicker. nice one, 'king' joe...

nutty says:

1. it's completely unsportsmanlike.

2. it says you've spent the rest of the game trying to beat the other team but haven't found a way to do so, so now you try this desperate move involving none of your own players...

3. if you're going to allow it, make it a compulsory 15-yard penalty for doing so.

4. nobody wants to end a game this way.

5. if you're going to lose, do so with some fucking dignity. all the tributes to sean taylor yesterday and you decide to end the game like this?

pure class...

in rugby, the losing side stands and applauds the victor off the field for beating them fair and square, joe.

wait for the outpouring of cheese...

Bills take on grieving Redskins.

one thing is for sure as regards victims of gun crime in this country. if you're not famous, and/or you're not in school/college, and/or you don't die, nobody in the media gives a fuck.

hey fred smoot, next time you blow a cover and allow a touchdown pass, please raise your finger and point to heaven. life is also about our failures, not just cherry picking our successes.

daredevil Evel Knievel dies

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7122258.stm

Legendary US daredevil Evel Knievel has died at the age of 69.

...if you are a male aged somewhere between 40 and 60, you probably did what i did as a kid and watched him on tv, attempting the impossible.

you then went outside, set up small ramps in the garden and jumped them on your bicycle (often coming off) pretending to be him. he was your daredevil hero.

very few ever get to have that sort of impact.

when i had my really big motorcycle accident, i always joked that unlike evel knieval, i couldn't even clear one car...

Taking Science on Faith - nutty responds to a physisict

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/opinion/24davies.html

http://cosmos.asu.edu/

SCIENCE, we are repeatedly told, is the most reliable form of knowledge about the world because it is based on testable hypotheses. Religion, by contrast, is based on faith. The term “doubting Thomas” well illustrates the difference. In science, a healthy skepticism is a professional necessity, whereas in religion, having belief without evidence is regarded as a virtue.

The problem with this neat separation into “non-overlapping magisteria,” as Stephen Jay Gould described science and religion, is that science has its own faith-based belief system. All science proceeds on the assumption that nature is ordered in a rational and intelligible way. You couldn’t be a scientist if you thought the universe was a meaningless jumble of odds and ends haphazardly juxtaposed. When physicists probe to a deeper level of subatomic structure, or astronomers extend the reach of their instruments, they expect to encounter additional elegant mathematical order. And so far this faith has been justified.

The most refined expression of the rational intelligibility of the cosmos is found in the laws of physics, the fundamental rules on which nature runs. The laws of gravitation and electromagnetism, the laws that regulate the world within the atom, the laws of motion — all are expressed as tidy mathematical relationships. But where do these laws come from? And why do they have the form that they do?

When I was a student, the laws of physics were regarded as completely off limits. The job of the scientist, we were told, is to discover the laws and apply them, not inquire into their provenance. The laws were treated as “given” — imprinted on the universe like a maker’s mark at the moment of cosmic birth — and fixed forevermore. Therefore, to be a scientist, you had to have faith that the universe is governed by dependable, immutable, absolute, universal, mathematical laws of an unspecified origin. You’ve got to believe that these laws won’t fail, that we won’t wake up tomorrow to find heat flowing from cold to hot, or the speed of light changing by the hour.

Over the years I have often asked my physicist colleagues why the laws of physics are what they are. The answers vary from “that’s not a scientific question” to “nobody knows.” The favorite reply is, “There is no reason they are what they are — they just are.” The idea that the laws exist reasonlessly is deeply anti-rational. After all, the very essence of a scientific explanation of some phenomenon is that the world is ordered logically and that there are reasons things are as they are. If one traces these reasons all the way down to the bedrock of reality — the laws of physics — only to find that reason then deserts us, it makes a mockery of science.

Can the mighty edifice of physical order we perceive in the world about us ultimately be rooted in reasonless absurdity? If so, then nature is a fiendishly clever bit of trickery: meaninglessness and absurdity somehow masquerading as ingenious order and rationality.

Although scientists have long had an inclination to shrug aside such questions concerning the source of the laws of physics, the mood has now shifted considerably. Part of the reason is the growing acceptance that the emergence of life in the universe, and hence the existence of observers like ourselves, depends rather sensitively on the form of the laws. If the laws of physics were just any old ragbag of rules, life would almost certainly not exist.

A second reason that the laws of physics have now been brought within the scope of scientific inquiry is the realization that what we long regarded as absolute and universal laws might not be truly fundamental at all, but more like local bylaws. They could vary from place to place on a mega-cosmic scale. A God’s-eye view might reveal a vast patchwork quilt of universes, each with its own distinctive set of bylaws. In this “multiverse,” life will arise only in those patches with bio-friendly bylaws, so it is no surprise that we find ourselves in a Goldilocks universe — one that is just right for life. We have selected it by our very existence.

The multiverse theory is increasingly popular, but it doesn’t so much explain the laws of physics as dodge the whole issue. There has to be a physical mechanism to make all those universes and bestow bylaws on them. This process will require its own laws, or meta-laws. Where do they come from? The problem has simply been shifted up a level from the laws of the universe to the meta-laws of the multiverse.

Clearly, then, both religion and science are founded on faith — namely, on belief in the existence of something outside the universe, like an unexplained God or an unexplained set of physical laws, maybe even a huge ensemble of unseen universes, too. For that reason, both monotheistic religion and orthodox science fail to provide a complete account of physical existence.

This shared failing is no surprise, because the very notion of physical law is a theological one in the first place, a fact that makes many scientists squirm. Isaac Newton first got the idea of absolute, universal, perfect, immutable laws from the Christian doctrine that God created the world and ordered it in a rational way. Christians envisage God as upholding the natural order from beyond the universe, while physicists think of their laws as inhabiting an abstract transcendent realm of perfect mathematical relationships.

And just as Christians claim that the world depends utterly on God for its existence, while the converse is not the case, so physicists declare a similar asymmetry: the universe is governed by eternal laws (or meta-laws), but the laws are completely impervious to what happens in the universe.

It seems to me there is no hope of ever explaining why the physical universe is as it is so long as we are fixated on immutable laws or meta-laws that exist reasonlessly or are imposed by divine providence. The alternative is to regard the laws of physics and the universe they govern as part and parcel of a unitary system, and to be incorporated together within a common explanatory scheme.

In other words, the laws should have an explanation from within the universe and not involve appealing to an external agency. The specifics of that explanation are a matter for future research. But until science comes up with a testable theory of the laws of the universe, its claim to be free of faith is manifestly bogus.

Paul Davies is the director of Beyond, a research center at Arizona State University, and the author of “Cosmic Jackpot: Why Our Universe Is Just Right for Life.”

e-mail to Paul Davies (nutty's response) deepthought@asu.edu

re: an amateur astronomer responding to your new york times article

Taking Science on Faith – a star is born…

Sir,

as an amateur astronomer, I may not enjoy the powerful scientific intellect that you are renowned for. I'm not even a scientist, but I am an interested reader, and I take issue with your Op-Ed piece in the New York Times: Taking Science on Faith.

You begin by formulating an argument conveniently omitting any reference to quantum mechanics (science’s single most successful scientific theory). Why so?, because the very nature of quantum mechanics appears at direct odds with any “immutable laws” argument i.e. probabilistic as opposed to deterministic. In any case, where in the literature does it state that scientific laws are immutable? Find me a document that has prevented Paul Davies from improving upon or overturning any of Newton’s or Einstein’s Laws.

I think the use of such language here is highly questionable. Do you care to answer what NASA’s Gravity B Probe is doing in space if it is not testing Einstein’s “immutable laws”? Didn’t Einstein himself give the world a new way of thinking about space and time? Last time I checked, we still haven’t ‘abandoned’ Newton’s laws of gravity. What immutable laws are you talking about? Correct me if I’m wrong, Mr. Davies, but Isn’t science supposed to disprove, not prove?

You take the word ‘faith’ and apply it equally to both science and religion, disregarding the fact that science is based on observation and methodology, and the historical record is available for anyone to examine. Where is the faith you speak of in these records?

While I agree that in principle the laws of physics can be seen to be taken on ‘faith’, do you not lessen the impact of the argument by reducing the power of science as if faith in it were of somehow equal value, that faith in science’s laws itself merited the same intellectual discipline that theology deserves from faith in its origins.

This is very sweeping, safely typing away on your computer operating on the principles of quantum mechanics. Less than a thousand years ago, the world of mathematics was viewed as the work of the devil, faith then meant religious struggle, protestants strived to create ‘pure’ Christianity, and rebelled against the Catholic church with its papal doctrines. Men and women sought after god, one way or another. They believed. Oh yes, they also had the torturous (sic) inquisition… if you wish to hold up ‘faith’ in science’s laws to those of religion in both hands and pretend they are the same, that’s up to you. I personally give one a lot more intellectual weight than the other. I find it strange that this view is written in an Op-Ed article. Exactly who is this written for?

“Can the mighty edifice of physical order we perceive in the world about us ultimately be rooted in reasonless absurdity?”

While it may be without ‘reason’ to suggest that it is absurd is mystifying. What exactly is so absurd about the physical laws that are the key to understanding Doppler shift for instance? Are they any more absurd than the fundamental tools you would use to learn a new language? The motive for learning the language is ours, of course.

Interestingly, while I agree that both religion and science were indeed founded on faith, you discuss the hypothetical possibility that we might live in a “multiverse”. I’m curious as to why take the reader from immutable laws to hypothetical possibilities in an argument supposedly dealing with what’s wrong with science adopting the faith-based strategy?

“physical law is a theological one in the first place” sorry Mr. Davies, but if new physical processes are discovered, and if by some 'miraculous' means a new physical laws can be written when the Large Hadron Collider begins operating, I doubt very much that that those laws will be theological, even if the so-called God Particle (Higgs boson) is discovered.

“until science comes up with a testable theory of the laws of the universe, its claim to be free of faith is manifestly bogus.” Why so? If we have arrived at a modern limit to our present understanding because of limits to available technology, I’d like to know what is so wrong. I think it wrong to write scientists off so incredibly early given the fact that we’ve only had pocket calculators available for some 30 years…

Faith. The crux of your argument. Take the story of Jesus, and the Star of Bethlehem. Told to us by the unknown author of the Gospel of Matthew. It recounts wise men coming from the east to Jerusalem after seeing a remarkable star, then finding a newborn king by following the star to his humble birthplace. The Star of Bethlehem “goes before them” and stops “over where the child was,”…you know the rest. No independent report of such a sky event exists. The story was written not by a contemporary but by an apologist about 100 years – more than a human lifetime – after the fact. Scientifically, any search for an astronomical Star of Bethlehem is fatally flawed, based in part on the text of Matthew in its original language. An honest look shows that not only do all astronomical explanations fail to fit the story, but the historical reliability of the tale itself is simply too low to take as fact.

The problems then are overwhelming. The Gospel narratives of Jesus’ infancy contradict each other, no account of the star exists elsewhere, the tale was written a lifetime or more later by an apologist familiar with the miracle-birth stories at the time. As such, a believer can simply bury their heads in biblical sand and view the Star as a local miracle that the magi alone could see. A historian can only regard the tale as fictional or at least not investigable, and to astronomers – it is a star we’re talking about, astronomy is irrelevant. We are completely unable to match any such event with the records.

And THIS, Mr Davies, is what you are comparing science to? Keep this in mind as you enter the stores playing their endless (how many times must I hear this) christmas music from now on until after December 25th. Perhaps a different word might have triggered a less heated response.

Children (especially in the United States) are systematically taught (from a very early, impressionable age) that there is somehow a higher kind of knowledge which comes from faith, which comes from revelation, which comes from scripture, which comes from tradition, and that it is the equal if not the superior of knowledge that comes from real (scientific) evidence.

I was reminded of this at a thanksgiving dinner. As a newly-wed atheist, I sat there, listening to a mother prompt her child, among others: “is there anyone who wants to give thanks to god?” she asked at the dinner table. I resisted my deepest urge to respond with an arsenal of ‘reason’. After all, I was the odd one out; the new addition to the family. Sometimes diplomacy is the best policy if not the best intellectual device.

cheers!

Teacher charged over teddy row

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7117430.stm

...cartoons? teddy bears? just about anything you can think of.

religion rears it's ugly head again. it's so fucking unreasonable. oh no. you can't criticise it.

it's the 21st century! if you want to go back to living in the dark ages, give up what the world of science has given humanity, and let those who want to think and express themselves without fear of repression do so.

isn't freedom of speech central to any definition of a truly modern world?

i'm so offended, i shall now name my footlong, turkey breast, subway sandwich 'Muhammad'.


...mmm...nice with spicy mustard.

T-Mobile ends cycling sponsorship

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/7115547.stm

T-Mobile is to end sponsorship of its cycling team after a succession of doping scandals.

...manufacturers of pink lycra are said to be devastated by the news.

Redskins Star Sean Taylor Dies After Shooting

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/sports/AP-FBN-Obit-Taylor.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

MIAMI (AP) Washington Redskins safety Sean Taylor has died, a day after he was shot at home, said family friend Richard Sharpstein.

He said Taylor's father called him around 5:30 a.m. to tell him the news.

''His father called and said he was with Christ and he cried and thanked me,'' said Sharpstein, Taylor's former lawyer. ''It's a tremendously sad and unnecessary event. He was a wonderful, humble, talented young man, and had a huge life in front of him. Obviously God had other plans.''

...Taylor was also fined at least seven times for late hits, uniform violations and other infractions over his first three seasons, including a $17,000 penalty for spitting in the face of Tampa Bay running back Michael Pittman during a playoff game in January 2006.

sorry about his death, but as for the religious stuff; i'm not buying.

...yeah, for someone who liked to hit people as hard as possible, exactly what is he going to be doing on sundays from now on? singing hymns? watching that doddery lunatic pat robertson instead of his mates play football? sure...

why when anyone dies do we automatically proclaim that they go to heaven? cemeterys don't have any headstones that suggest the other place. i mean they can't all be up there, given that sunday after bloody sunday, churches tell their congregations that everyone's a sinner. repent, repent, find jesus. ask god for forgiveness. then when you've found him, you can spend the rest of your life worshipping him. only then he will forgive you.

FOR WHAT!? being normal, like everyone else?

i'm just a normal bloke. i don't need anyone worshipping me. so why would god, the so-called creator of the universe need his little experiment on earth to worship him? if i went to a therapist and told them i needed people to worship me, do you think they would classify me as being insecure?

oh and one other thing. i know i'm going to die. no heaven, or hell for nutty. just decomposition.

and isn't it big of god to dangle the promise of everlasting life to us 'mere' mortals, given that he himself never has to face death...

"God is always in control," Pedro Taylor later told reporters. "We have no control of life or death ... we thank Him for all 24 years of having Sean here. I know it sounds short, but that's His will and it was done."

Blair feared faith 'nutter' label

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7111620.stm

Tony Blair avoided talking about his religious views while in office for fear of being labelled "a nutter", the former prime minister has revealed.

"For me having faith was an important part of being able to do that," he said.

But while it was commonplace in the US and elsewhere for politicians to talk about their religious convictions, he added, "you talk about it in our system and, frankly, people do think you're a nutter".

... how to drag the honourable name of 'nutter' to the lowest depths.

Direct quote from the just published REAGAN DIARIES

The entry is dated May 17, 1986.

‘A moment I’ve been dreading. George brought his ne’re-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I’ll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they’ll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work.’

Japanese whalers hunt humpbacks

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7099720.stm

human beings. they just can't help themselves can they?

comet holmes

managed to get an image of comet holmes from pennsylvania this past weekend before it disappears for good.

in the end i wasn't able to stack multiple images to get a better image as i tried , but at least i got a shot in.

click on image for a better view.

details: canon 30D with william optics 66mm refractor piggybacked onto 8" SCT telescope. 5 seconds at iso1600.

update: comet holmes is now the largest object in the solar system...

intelligent design vs evolution

anyone see last night's nova/pbs program about intelligent design and the teaching of it alongside evolution in science classes in dover schools?

one doesn't exactly have to be a rocket scientist to see that intelligent design is but creationism in different clothes. i particularly loved the draft document they showed supplied as a supporting draft to the book themselves that condemns them

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

see the discovery institute's (very reasonable...) response to the program:

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/needs_title.html

...www.evolutionnews.org? must be a typo. should read www.religiousbollocks.org


philip johnson, the father of intelligent design:

Q: How do you explain our genetic relatedness with chimpanzees?

Johnson: There is a relatedness. But what does it mean? Say we have almost 99 percent of our genes in common with chimpanzees. We also have at least 25 percent of our genes in common with bananas. There are these commonalities that exist throughout life. Do they point to a common evolutionary process or a common creator? That is the question for interpretation.

The genes are going to win when people ask me about that great degree of similarity between human genes and chimpanzee genes. I answer that genes must not be anywhere near as important as we have been led to believe. If there were that great a commonality between chimps and humans, it ought to be relatively easy to breed chimps and come up with a human being, or by genetic engineering to change a chimp into a human. We ought to see humans occasionally being born to chimps or perhaps chimps born into human families.

... i repeat: "genes must not be anywhere near as important as we have been led to believe."

draw your own conclusions, and next time you go to the doctor, ask him just how important genes are with respect to causing congenital diseases and disorders.

right brain vs left brain

many thanks to david fogel for forwarding this via his eightyeightdc blog.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22556281-661,00.html

http://www.eightyeightdc.com/88blog/

took some images of the comet.

daisy & i went up to see her folks in pennslyvania this friday eve, and came back today. took the telescopes, so i could get a good look at comet holmes. it looked huge in the big 'scope.

also set the camera up and took some shots (through the little telescope), which i'll work on tomorrow and put an image up on the blog of the comet.

want to see a comet using just your naked eyes?

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/home/10862521.html

you have july 4th, england has november 5th

guy fawkes day and bonfire night!

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.novareinna.com/festive/fawkes.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.novareinna.com/festive/fawkes.html&h=404&w=356&sz=80&tbnid=suqsGKtnbgjYnM:&tbnh=124&tbnw=109&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dguy%2Bfawkes%26um%3D1&start=3&sa=X&oi=images&ct=image&cd=3

http://www.exmsft.com/~davidco/History/fawkes1.htm

happy birthday to my niece, stephanie.

happy 17th!

:)

faces of battle exhibition - not in this country, of course...

http://www.national-army-museum.ac.uk/pages/facesOfBattle.shtml

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/07/magazine_faces_of_battle/html/1.stm

how brave to have a free public exhibition about those who who have to SURVIVE war's horrific injuries as opposed to glorifying them for us when they die.

only in england, of course. the uk also gets to see its dead soldiers on tv as well there...

our magnetic earth

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/7072715.stm

The World Digital Magnetic Anomaly Map (WDMAM) shows the variation in strength of the magnetic field after the Earth's dipole field has been removed. Earth's dipole field is generated by circulating electric currents in the planet's metal core. It varies from 35,000 nanoTesla (nT) at the Equator to 70,000 nT at the poles.

...that's way better than a bar magnet, & some iron filings sprinkled on a piece of paper in science class.

when the wii is not enough...

the wii zapper!

happy halloween!

a big thanks to tanc, tiernan, mark, and everyone else at jimmy valentine's for a great halloween party on saturday night!

Victims in Wildfire’s Path Say, ‘Why Me?’

from the new york times:

Mr. Tohsakul, a television news program manager, rested assured on Monday that the fire was miles from his house after viewing scenes of the area shot by one of the station’s cameramen. But on Tuesday afternoon, he sat in his driveway taking deep breaths at the sight of the roof caved in and his possessions charred.

“What did I do to deserve this?” he said, looking at several unscathed homes next to his. “It’s just unbelievable.”

Mr. Becker returned from out of town and talked his way past police barricades to arrive at his house, with only a touch of damage to a fence. “I have no idea why we got saved and others didn’t,” he said.

Local television overnight had fixed on the image of a large house, a 10,000-square-foot Mediterranean-style hilltop jewel, burning to the ground in Rancho Santa Fe, a wealthy area. It belonged to Bob Jaffe, a venture capitalist, who visited the wreck on Tuesday. His Porsche somehow survived.

.....

Some residents fumed at what they considered a slow response by firefighters, who have struggled to rush from fire to fire across Southern California.

why me? - perhaps some background reading...

the united states is witnessing a population surge into the open country - into a place where fire ecology has always been very much part of the natural order, much like it is in the mediterranean. this means that the fastest growing areas of the US are in places that are most prone to wildfire - the canyons, mesas and alpine retreats of the west.

warming trends for nearly 30 years along with heat records that nobody wants, has created conditions for new fires that not only burn hotter, but larger.

recently in greece, nearly 450,000 acres of olive groves, forests and parkland were consumed by raging fires. by contrast, the west has lost nearly 20 times that amount this year.

still thousands are moving into the open country at the far suburban edge of fast-growing western cities. since 1990 more than eight million homes have been built in western areas on the surface, the land still looks good. but the trees in most western forests are sick. they are losing their fire-resistant resin or bark. all these people are now living in places where fire is part of the natural cycle…

in addition, we are witnessing the rise of a new type of home in these new communities at the edge of a national forest. people are not building little cabins or humble mountain shacks. we want big, sometimes trophy homes of 5,000 square feet or more, three stories, half a dozen bedrooms, often with huge timbers.

in the wilderness, away from the urban clusters, they expect that the wild will not touch them. but fire, is a much a part of this ecology as perennial grass. fire renews the forest. many trees such as sequoia’s and some pines and other plants require fire in order to release the seed from the husk. a whole class of plant life require fire in order to reproduce.

these new houses, look perfect in their wilderness backdrop setting, but to a fire, they are just fuel. the people who live in these homes - also expect someone outside their community to protect them when a fire does break out.

the forest service, originally set up to nurture and patrol the great publicly-owned reserves of the west, has become the fire service. they spend nearly half their budget on helicopters, tractors, buckets and paying to feed and move these big camps of seasonal firefighters.

Why me? perhaps because we shouldn’t be living in these areas in such great numbers in the first place...

Bush Asks Congress For $46 Billion More In War Funding

the trillion dollar president...

If approved by Congress in its entirety, it would bring the total appropriated since then to more than $800 billion. At their current rate, war appropriations could reach $1 trillion by the time Bush leaves office, a total that by some measures would exceed the cost of the Korean and Vietnam wars combined.

think what could have been done had george spent a trillion dollars on health care.

it's not like the united states leads the developed world...

click on the table for a clearer view of the figures.

the brazilian grand prix

for the first time in 21 years, three drivers compete for the drivers championship title.

britain's lewis hamilton can do what no other driver has done before and become the champion in his debut season...

live on speed channel. now.

congratulations to south africa!

what a great game of rugby we witnessed yesterday. hard, physical & clean.

...no antics, no names on players' backs, and no commercial breaks during the game except at the half. no mention of money either during the entire broadcast.

imagine that, america.

France 10-34 Argentina

Argentina powered to a convincing victory over France to claim third place in the Rugby World Cup on Friday.

The Pumas, the revelation of the tournament, ran in five tries to snuff out French hopes of revenge for their opening-match defeat last month.

...surely, the tri-nations will now be opened up to allow argentina to join. as for the six nations, the only thing that has proved is that it is time to take a good, long hard look and for europe to come up with another tournament as preparation for the world cup.

Putin wants US date to quit Iraq

the Whitehouse issued the following response:

"only if he steps into the octagon with the president to fight in UFC 78..."


"live from the oval room!..."

the struggle to find that perfect piece of furniture...

as the united states grapples with:

falling standards in education,

no free health care for its citizens,

poverty and homelessness among the most disadvantaged members of its society,

the disastrous war in iraq that has cost taxpayers $100 million dollars or so A DAY!!! the long-term cost of this 'war' could well top out at at $2 trillion dollars (and for what?)

what news do we hear about regarding the all-smiling presidential hopefuls?
WHY ARE THEY ALL SMILING?

The United States will hold its first billion dollar presidential election next year, heightening concerns about the influence of money in American politics.

if ever a country that had so much and squandered it was headed for a fall, this is surely it.

isn't there a single presidential candidate that can stop smiling long enough to take their gloves off, stop being afraid of the polls, tell the truth, and be a leader?

it's pretty obvious this country needs another martin luther king, but all we're seeing is a bunch of manicured suits that daren't say the wrong thing because they don't want to alienate potential voters..

climate change - for a change...

US urges climate change consensus

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said climate change is a real problem, and world leaders should forge a new global consensus on tackling it.

At a meeting of the top 16 polluting countries, Ms Rice said the US was "a major emitter" and was not "above the international community on the issue".

She said that the "growing problem" should be resolved under UN auspices.

...nutty says: tell your BIG boss to put his BIG money where his BIG mouth is, and actually DO a BIG SOMETHING.

meanwhile, i'm going to urge for a consensus that we have a banger of a party on halloween. it may not save the planet, and we may talk a lot of bollocks, but we won't be responsible for any misery either, unlike (i'm so hot) condi & (if i only had a brain) bushy.

i honestly believe that i may witness the extinction of polar bears in my lifetime. how sad if i'm right.

south africa v argentina

kickoff: 3:00pm

i think it would be an understatement to say that almost everyone in england is rooting for argentina.

can't see it happening, with south africa having never lost against argentina, but there again, nobody expected england to be in the final either, but ultimately, the springboks just have too many weapons to strike quickly against the pumas.

england are in the world cup final

amazing.

3pm tomorrow - rugby world cup semi final

from the bbc:

England v France (Sat)

Wilkinson will be key for England, while Ibanez will lead France

England v France
Saturday, 13 October
Stade de France, Paris

England will be hoping to maintain the momentum of a shock win over Australia when they meet France in Saturday's World Cup semi-final in Paris.

Brian Ashton's side played their best rugby for four years but they face a French team inspired by an equally surprise win against the All Blacks.

Both teams go into "Le Crunch" unchanged, with a final against either South Africa or Argentina beckoning.

"It will take another monster effort by England," said RFU supremo Rob Andrew.

Interview: England coach Brian Ashton

Report: Paris set for 'Le Crunch'

Blog video: Tom and Ben hit the streets in Paris

"As they did last week, there has to be enormous togetherness, huge commitment but also a smartness in how they play."

England have slumped in the four years since beating Australia in the 2003 World Cup final, and they were given no hope last month after scraping a win against USA and losing 36-0 to South Africa in their first two poool games.

If you haven't got that will to sacrifice your body and soul for the cause, then things won't happen England captain Phil Vickery

But their performances were more encouraging in victories over Samoa and Tonga and they overpowered the Australian scrum to win 12-10 in Marseille last Saturday.

"The most pleasing thing about England last week was that they attacked areas of Australia's game which were perceived as weaknesses and in certain areas destroyed Australia," former England fly-half Andrew told BBC Radio 5live.

"This week it's about finding those holes in the France game, if you can, and then putting them into practice on the field backed up with another performance of enormous courage and determination."

Up to 40,000 England fans are expected to descend on Paris for the match and England captain Phil Vickery said: "The circumstances have changed. Suddenly there is anticipation from outside the camp of what is going to happen.

"France are favourites, but I have got confidence in my team. It won't be easy, but if we didn't think we could win the game, we wouldn't be here.

"People are going to have to find performances within themselves they never thought they had. If you haven't got that will to sacrifice your body and soul for the cause, then things won't happen."

606: DEBATE England v France will be all about the back row WeDon'tBottle

England field five survivors from their 2003 World Cup final team - Jonny Wilkinson, Vickery, Jason Robinson, Josh Lewsey and Ben Kay.

Ashton said: "Having players who have been there and won a World Cup final will help to set the right tone when the day comes.

"It will be a momentous occasion, but it won't be a massive surprise to half the team.

"We've been told 40,000 people are crossing the Channel this weekend. They will be buzzing around Paris - it is unbelievable.

The English have what we don't have - the World Cup trophy France flanker Serge Betsen

"The support has been phenomenal, and it makes a massive difference. I hope as many as possible of them get tickets."

France, who lost the opening match of the tournament to Argentina en route to finishing second in their pool, came back from 13-0 down to win 20-18 against tournament favourites the All Blacks in Cardiff.

"Beating the best side in the world [NZ] was fantastic but we have to concentrate on the task ahead," said France scrum-half Jean-Baptiste Elissalde.

"We'll celebrate later. We will still able to watch that match on ESPN in 30 years.

"This match will be our toughest in the entire campaign. We must believe in ourselves. At stake is a ticket to the most beautiful thing on earth."

France, the Six Nations champions, beat experimental England sides twice in the summer warm-up games, though Ashton's men recorded a 26-18 victory at Twickenham in March.

The hosts have never won the World Cup and lost the 2003 semi-final 24-7 to England in Sydney.

Flanker Serge Betsen, who was sin-binned in France's defeat four years ago, said: "I felt guilty because the team was penalised as a result of my yellow card, but I think that will spur me on.

"The English have what we don't have - the World Cup trophy."

---

England: Robinson; Sackey, Tait, Catt, Lewsey; Wilkinson, Gomarsall; Sheridan, Regan, Vickery (capt), Shaw, Kay, Corry, Moody, Easter.
Replacements: Chuter, Stevens, Dallaglio, Worsley, Richards, Flood, Hipkiss.

France: Traille; Clerc, Marty, Jauzion, Heymans; Beauxis, Elissalde; Milloud, Ibanez (capt), De Villiers, Pelous, Thion, Betsen, Dusautoir, Bonnaire.
Replacements: Poux, Szarzewski, Chabal, Harinordoquy, Michalak, Dominici, Poitrenaud.

Referee: Jonathan Kaplan (South Africa)

Ice withdrawal 'shatters record'

Arctic sea ice shrank to the smallest area on record this year, US scientists have confirmed.

it's amazing but there are still people ( non-scientists) that refuse to believe that man is responsible for some of the dramatic changes we are seeing in our present climate.

i typed in "global warming is a myth" into google and found this site as the 3rd entry:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070315&articleId=5086

...."I am not saying that it isn’t a good idea to take action to help the environment, but I ask you to consider this: if the majority of scientific data points to the fact that global warming is caused by the Sun, then how will a tax on carbon emissions help to stop it? How does us driving cars cause climate change on Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Pluto, Neptune and Triton?"...

...It seems worrisome that politicians are all too eager to grab onto this man-made myth of global warming in order to make us afraid and guilty. Guilty enough to want to change it, and afraid enough to give up our freedoms and undergo massive financial expenses in order to do so. So this lie, being pushed by big money and big governments, is a convenient lie for those who want to exert control and collect money. However, it’s inconvenient for the mass amount of people who are already experiencing the problems of a widening wage-gap and fading middle class.

...If the problems we are being presented are based on lies, then how do we expect to find any true solution to helping the environment?...

right at the very end of the piece, we find out that the author is a 19-year old political student...in other words, he's not even studying a science degree! he's not even qualified to offer an opinion about a science issue!

i'm an amateur astronomer and familiar with the astronomical community and also the sun, how it works and how it will die. nobody is talking about the sun being responsible for global warming! are you reading about it anywhere in the science literature? i subscribe to a respected astronomy magazine and they sure aren't.

climate change on pluto? we know hardly anything about pluto! where are these so-called scientists getting their data from, the clangers?






better if they had mentioned nasa's new horizons pluto project, don't you think? http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/overview/whyGo.html

in science, they have a saying, outrageous claims requires outrageous evidence.

looking at the ice withdrawal image, i'd say the polar bears don't need convincing...

i leave the best nonsense i came across 'till last:

i found this gem on:
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/prog1.htm#suspend

"What's more, 100 million years ago, there was six times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is now, yet the temperature then was marginally cooler than it is today. Many scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide doesn't even affect climate."

i wonder why they don't tell us who they are...

sir roger penrose at george mason university

daisy and i just got back from hearing a great (and controversial) talk on the beginning of the universe at GMU.

http://quantum.gmu.edu/penrose
some very acclaimed names in the large audience, including paul davies, author of "the last three minutes" (highly recommended).

brilliant!

cleveland beat the yankees to face boston for division title

it's difficult for me to feel happier about seeing any sports team lose than seeing the new york yankees lose, especially in post-season play, and even more so when they lose and their owner's dreams of chasing yet another title come to and end.

george steinbrenner's completely mad obsession with 'winning is everything - nothing else matters' mentality, is so obnoxious that it defies all moral and ethical standards about normal sporting behavior and competition. year after year after year, major league baseball allows team owners to bankroll efforts that place them at a distinct advantage in order to win themselves a so-called 'world championship', a title surely long overdue a name change, since no other countries are allowed to compete in north america...

luckily, just throwing obscene amounts of cash at A-rod and the like hasn't gotten this nasty megalomaniac the title he so perversely craves, and so on the very eve of his team facing elimination because of cleveland's outstandingly better play, he tells the media that his manager, joe torre is paid a lot of money, and will most likely lose his job if they lose.

class.