Today Good Wife Sue and I took Lorna to Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St. Louis to see Lorna's hubby, Earl. Earl was transferred to BJC on Monday evening, from Salem, after they suspected that he had internal bleeding. We arrived just a few minutes after Pepe Kay, Earl's daughter from Valdosta, GA did. Pepe Kay is a medical professional and will keep to good close watch on what the folks at BJC are doing, but both Pepe Kay and Sandy (Earl's son) said that from what they had seen so far, the staff at BJC is superb. That's great news.
After we visited for a while, we emptied the tray table and I set up my portable Communion Kit. Then the six of us celebrated Holy Communion. Earl sat up in a chair, which was great to see, since he couldn't walk yesterday.
All of us are wondering if all of the excitement at Earl's 90th birthday parties (note the plural) simply exhausted him. I know that he has his share of the kind of ailments that seem, all too often, to be caused simply by aging. At least that is what we are hoping and praying for, since then physical therapy and meds can help him back on track.
Of course, growing older once one enters the "elderly" category is not just a simple thing. Getting enough exercise grows more difficult - even with gentle nagging from family and friends. Even relatively small illnesses begin to carry greater risk, since the body cannot respond the way it did when we were 35 or 40 years old. And sometimes older people grow into the attitude that it will all end soon, so I might just as well accept it and "go with the flow." I don't think Earl is in any of these categories - he is just too vibrant a man.
Good Wife Sue and I often joke about the differences in our personalities. She likes to leave the party early. So we joke about having her tombstone say, "Well, it's time to leave." I, on the other hand, love to stick around and talk. My tombstone should say, "Wait a minute! I'm not done!"
But as eternal people, just visiting this life, this body, this time, we need to be reconciled to the cycle of life that lets us one day pass from here to there. And we hope and pray that "there" is what Jesus Christ has hinted to us that it will be. We need to accept that the door will be opened to us, if only we will walk through it when the time comes.
I'm a strange mixture of the scientific person, humanly philosophical, and expectantly theological. In that place I find no fear for the future, but linger lovingly to learn even more about this creation of God's we call home. And I specially linger in the love of my wife, my family, and my church family. I pray that all of you also linger in love, and
Have sweet dreams and be blessed by God. TAD+
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
A Weekend of Mixed Emotions
I attended the annual synod for the Diocese of Springfield on Friday and Saturday. Not too much transpired. We'll have a "deficit budget" in 2010 after having run a deficit over the last year, the first time that has happened in any one's memory. We are just getting off the ground with the process of electing a Bishop Coadjutor (an assistant bishop with succession) to replace +Peter H. Beckwith, our current bishop. The Standing Committee hopes to have everything completed by February or March of 2011 (the Consecration of the new bishop). That may be quite ambitious, but we'll see.
At synod, Mother Molly spoke of the projects our Episcopal Church Women (ECW) will be doing in 2010. One of them is to purchase little heart-shaped medallions for mothers who lose their babies through still-birth or dead shortly after birth. She is a hospital Chaplain, so the ECW will help out at the hospital where she works. She gave a very good presentation and I spent the entire 10 minutes reliving my one CPE (Clinical Pastoral Education) unit during which I had a day on which five babies died or were born dead. I baptised three of them and said prayers and blessings over all of them. Then, after I left the hospital that day I completely "lost it" and had to pull over to the side of the highway (I-64 in Illinois) and balled my head off for what seemed like forever. God bless Chaplains of whatever stripe, for their work is extraordinarily hard to do.
I got back Saturday evening and immediately got a call that my oldest parishioner, Earl, had taken a fall and was in the local hospital. So after a few minutes of rest, we headed for Salem to check up on him. By the time I got there he was in a room - infinitely more comfortable than an ER bunk! We visited for a bit and he told me that he had felt a bit light-headed before falling (in the bathroom). He hadn't told the ER doctors or the floor nurses about the light-headedness, because, "... my legs just wouldn't hold me up." so I spent last night and today's visit alerting the medical staff of that condition. Finally, today, Earl's son, Sandy, showed up and I told him and he said that he would personally tell the physician in the morning. I sure hope so. Earl just turned 90 and we all want to have him around for as many more years as possible!
Today, as Good Wife Sue and I were returning to the hospital to bring some flowers from the church to Earl, another of my folks, Tom, came out of the ER with two of his grandchildren. I called to him, "Hey, Tom, have you been to see Earl?" He said "No, Molly just died." Molly was the foster child of Tom's daughter, Jennifer. Jenn had really fallen in love with this little baby girl, even though she had some very severe health problems. We all were aware that she would die quite young, but had hoped and prayed that a few years with Jenn would show her the love and compassion she needed. But now she is gone and the entire family is in pain. Tom was able to baptise her as she died and I asked him to record that in our service register and I'll add her name to the long role of those who have gone to God before us. Jenn and her kids are now longer members of St. Thomas, but they will always be a part of us. And I will ask that all my people pray for her and the family. For all that the rest of us can do is to be present to Jenn and the rest of the family. In faith we give over to God's love, the soul of little Molly, praying that she rest for ever in God's peace.
Tomorrow I visit my family doctor to have a growth removed from my forehead. He doesn't think it is cancerous (nor do I), but it has gotten quite a bit larger in the last few months and is swelling up, so it is often uncomfortable under a cap or hat. So it is time for it to go. I'll just look even more ugly than normal for a few days!
And God's peace be with all this night. TAD+
At synod, Mother Molly spoke of the projects our Episcopal Church Women (ECW) will be doing in 2010. One of them is to purchase little heart-shaped medallions for mothers who lose their babies through still-birth or dead shortly after birth. She is a hospital Chaplain, so the ECW will help out at the hospital where she works. She gave a very good presentation and I spent the entire 10 minutes reliving my one CPE (Clinical Pastoral Education) unit during which I had a day on which five babies died or were born dead. I baptised three of them and said prayers and blessings over all of them. Then, after I left the hospital that day I completely "lost it" and had to pull over to the side of the highway (I-64 in Illinois) and balled my head off for what seemed like forever. God bless Chaplains of whatever stripe, for their work is extraordinarily hard to do.
I got back Saturday evening and immediately got a call that my oldest parishioner, Earl, had taken a fall and was in the local hospital. So after a few minutes of rest, we headed for Salem to check up on him. By the time I got there he was in a room - infinitely more comfortable than an ER bunk! We visited for a bit and he told me that he had felt a bit light-headed before falling (in the bathroom). He hadn't told the ER doctors or the floor nurses about the light-headedness, because, "... my legs just wouldn't hold me up." so I spent last night and today's visit alerting the medical staff of that condition. Finally, today, Earl's son, Sandy, showed up and I told him and he said that he would personally tell the physician in the morning. I sure hope so. Earl just turned 90 and we all want to have him around for as many more years as possible!
Today, as Good Wife Sue and I were returning to the hospital to bring some flowers from the church to Earl, another of my folks, Tom, came out of the ER with two of his grandchildren. I called to him, "Hey, Tom, have you been to see Earl?" He said "No, Molly just died." Molly was the foster child of Tom's daughter, Jennifer. Jenn had really fallen in love with this little baby girl, even though she had some very severe health problems. We all were aware that she would die quite young, but had hoped and prayed that a few years with Jenn would show her the love and compassion she needed. But now she is gone and the entire family is in pain. Tom was able to baptise her as she died and I asked him to record that in our service register and I'll add her name to the long role of those who have gone to God before us. Jenn and her kids are now longer members of St. Thomas, but they will always be a part of us. And I will ask that all my people pray for her and the family. For all that the rest of us can do is to be present to Jenn and the rest of the family. In faith we give over to God's love, the soul of little Molly, praying that she rest for ever in God's peace.
Tomorrow I visit my family doctor to have a growth removed from my forehead. He doesn't think it is cancerous (nor do I), but it has gotten quite a bit larger in the last few months and is swelling up, so it is often uncomfortable under a cap or hat. So it is time for it to go. I'll just look even more ugly than normal for a few days!
And God's peace be with all this night. TAD+
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Afghanistan - Again!
According to news reports, General McChrystal has asked for an additional 80,000 troops for Afghanistan for the "Optimal Response." Failing that he will settle for 40,000 troops for a "Middle Ground" reponse. The problem is that neither figure is realistic for a counter-insurgency.
As Frank Rich recently pointed out, General McChrystal's boss, General Petraeus, has written that a counter-insurgency strategy that has even a chance of succeeding will require 20 - 25 soldiers for every 1,000 people in the population of the nation at war. Given that Afghanistan has a population of almost 30,000,000 (that's THIRTY MILLION), the minimal troop level (using 20 per 1,000, is 600,000 troops.
In Vietnam we had over 550,000 troops in an area far smaller than Afghanistan and we were never able to stabilize the place. The local Afghanistan government is at least as corrupt as was the South Vietnamese government, so we really can't count on them contributing much to stabilize their own country. Think about how truly difficult it is to create an army. If we are really, really lucky we might see a competent force of around 200,000 Afghani troops after a 5 - 7 year development cycle - but don't count on it. In Vietnam we learned that you can make a person an E-5 anytime you want to, but it takes 3 - 6 years to develop a Second Class Petty Officer. And one needs a really competent corps of E-5 through E-7 enlisted people to have a successful miltary. Likewise with officers. You can give any fool a Colonel's Eagle, but it takes years to develop a competent Officer Corps of Captains, Majors, Lieutenant Colonels and Colonels.
But in the end, bringing long term stability and peace to that poor country (we really can't call it a nation) will be the responsibility of the people and government of Afghanistan. So what, then, is our best option - one that helps them to help themselves at relatively minimal risk to our own forces? It seems to me that it would be a rather minimal option.
We're stuck with being there because we got ourselves sidetracked into Iraq by a man who had a vendetta to satisfy, so we can't just abandon the people and place. But we need to do what we can to secure the main population centers, work diligently to get a reasonably honest government in place, and train an Afghani army to take the battle to the countryside. Those Afghani forces need to do the grunt work, slowly (very slowly) at first, then with increasing efficiency and alacrity as they gain experience. Some of our troops will be at risk as they work alongside the indigenous forces, but their role must be advisory, not combat leading, not manning the "front lines" (which don't exist, anyway).
That, it seems to me, would require some increase in the level of US forces, but certainly not 40,000 - 80,000 more. We can secure the cities. Any more than that and training puts our troops at an unacceptable level of risk with little or no real prospect for long term success. It also lets us develop timelines for achieving measurable success. If the people and government of Afghanistan refuse to play their part in this, then a drawdown and disengagement are the only recourse. But let's not wait until the casualty lists get long enough to cause the American public to lose faith in the ability of our military leadership to come up with actual workable solutions. This beats the daylights out of simply adding more, then more, then more troops to a deteriorating situation.
Truth in advertising: I was actively involved in the Vietnam conflict (getting ready to go there, being there, just having left there) from March of 1966 through December of 1971 (with four combat tours). I was an Ensign, USN, when I started and a Lieutenant Commander, USN, when it ended. It was a bottomless pit and, yes, Afghanistan has the ability to create the same kind of trap for us. Not in terms of a high casualty rate (although it could get quite bad), but in terms of sucking us into a black hole from which escape will be painful and injurious to our valiant fighting force.
My fear is that our military leadership, which is a wonderfully capable combat leadership, cannot see beyond "the military counter-insurgency option." In a place as vast and difficult as is Afghanistan, military projection of U.S. power won't work. Only indigenous forces that understand and live in that culture stand any chance at all, and even that chance has a non-zero probability of failure. Our probability of failure is probably at least an order of magnitude higher.
Pray for a wise choice by President Obama and his advisors.
Sleep well and God Bless All. TAD+
As Frank Rich recently pointed out, General McChrystal's boss, General Petraeus, has written that a counter-insurgency strategy that has even a chance of succeeding will require 20 - 25 soldiers for every 1,000 people in the population of the nation at war. Given that Afghanistan has a population of almost 30,000,000 (that's THIRTY MILLION), the minimal troop level (using 20 per 1,000, is 600,000 troops.
In Vietnam we had over 550,000 troops in an area far smaller than Afghanistan and we were never able to stabilize the place. The local Afghanistan government is at least as corrupt as was the South Vietnamese government, so we really can't count on them contributing much to stabilize their own country. Think about how truly difficult it is to create an army. If we are really, really lucky we might see a competent force of around 200,000 Afghani troops after a 5 - 7 year development cycle - but don't count on it. In Vietnam we learned that you can make a person an E-5 anytime you want to, but it takes 3 - 6 years to develop a Second Class Petty Officer. And one needs a really competent corps of E-5 through E-7 enlisted people to have a successful miltary. Likewise with officers. You can give any fool a Colonel's Eagle, but it takes years to develop a competent Officer Corps of Captains, Majors, Lieutenant Colonels and Colonels.
But in the end, bringing long term stability and peace to that poor country (we really can't call it a nation) will be the responsibility of the people and government of Afghanistan. So what, then, is our best option - one that helps them to help themselves at relatively minimal risk to our own forces? It seems to me that it would be a rather minimal option.
We're stuck with being there because we got ourselves sidetracked into Iraq by a man who had a vendetta to satisfy, so we can't just abandon the people and place. But we need to do what we can to secure the main population centers, work diligently to get a reasonably honest government in place, and train an Afghani army to take the battle to the countryside. Those Afghani forces need to do the grunt work, slowly (very slowly) at first, then with increasing efficiency and alacrity as they gain experience. Some of our troops will be at risk as they work alongside the indigenous forces, but their role must be advisory, not combat leading, not manning the "front lines" (which don't exist, anyway).
That, it seems to me, would require some increase in the level of US forces, but certainly not 40,000 - 80,000 more. We can secure the cities. Any more than that and training puts our troops at an unacceptable level of risk with little or no real prospect for long term success. It also lets us develop timelines for achieving measurable success. If the people and government of Afghanistan refuse to play their part in this, then a drawdown and disengagement are the only recourse. But let's not wait until the casualty lists get long enough to cause the American public to lose faith in the ability of our military leadership to come up with actual workable solutions. This beats the daylights out of simply adding more, then more, then more troops to a deteriorating situation.
Truth in advertising: I was actively involved in the Vietnam conflict (getting ready to go there, being there, just having left there) from March of 1966 through December of 1971 (with four combat tours). I was an Ensign, USN, when I started and a Lieutenant Commander, USN, when it ended. It was a bottomless pit and, yes, Afghanistan has the ability to create the same kind of trap for us. Not in terms of a high casualty rate (although it could get quite bad), but in terms of sucking us into a black hole from which escape will be painful and injurious to our valiant fighting force.
My fear is that our military leadership, which is a wonderfully capable combat leadership, cannot see beyond "the military counter-insurgency option." In a place as vast and difficult as is Afghanistan, military projection of U.S. power won't work. Only indigenous forces that understand and live in that culture stand any chance at all, and even that chance has a non-zero probability of failure. Our probability of failure is probably at least an order of magnitude higher.
Pray for a wise choice by President Obama and his advisors.
Sleep well and God Bless All. TAD+
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Evolution vs Creationism
Today being the first Wednesday of the month I attended the local Ministerial Alliance meeting. All was routine up until the last five minutes when the Baptist minister brought up a CD he had received, and brought in to share, about how wrong evolution is. Well, that opened the flood gates. The murmuring around the table was, as expected, strictly pro-creationism and virulently anti-evolution.
One of the minsters, from one of our Christian Churches (the denomination), brought up the new skeleton that was in the news a couple of days ago, Ardi. "Ardi" is short for Ardipithecus ramidus, a 4.4 million year old hominid that predates "Lucy" by about 1.2 million years. Lucy is of the species Australopithicus afarensis, closer to us in the chain of things.
The Christian Church minister was positively gleeful over finding Ardi, for he said, "It shows that we are not descended from the monkeys, something that is in all the Biology books." That was curious, since I have never read a real science Biology textbook that said that we were descended from monkeys. I collect old science books and one of my oldest Biology books is an early 1920s "First Biology" for high school students that says, to quote, "Biology does not teach that humans descended from monkeys." A college text I have does not teach that either. In fact all of the modern books that I do have note that we and the monkeys and the apes come from some long extinct common ancestor. All Ardi does is put that common ancestor more distant, structurally, from us than is Lucy.
What tickled me about the ministers gleefulness was that they were using a 4.4 million year old skeleton to "prove" that man did not come from the monkeys. To them a 4.4 million year skeleton should not exist. These guys are all "young earth" proponents! Even 1 million years ago is questionable, since "everything" was created only 6,000 years ago, in 4004 BCE (according to the creationist timetable).
It struck me that creationist's real fear is in being related to animals like monkeys and apes. If, somehow, it can be shown that there are no monkeys in the family tree, then God's peace will again reign on earth. Maybe the idea of being descended from pond scum is OK, just as long as there are no immoral buffoonish monkeys there! After all, we can't be descended from something that swings from the trees and shows off its private parts in great displays of primate sexuality, can we?
Anyway, these good folk are really stuck in an old paradigm. I think that even if God him-and-her-self were to show up and shout, "Yes, I did it using evolution" they wouldn't believe it, for they have too much invested in a literal point of view. Too bad for them, for modern Biological Science and its offshoot, medicine, are dependent upon the validity of evolutionary fact.
If the creationists were to win "the war" here in the United States, all that would mean is that meaningful scientific and medical progress would shift elsewhere. And if the reformation teaches us anything, it will move elsewhere. For in the 17th Century science left Italian and southern European schools (under the gun of the backward-looking Roman Catholic Church) and moved north to Germany, the Low Countries, and England. Galileo was the end of South European science and Isaac Newton represents the flowering of Northern Science. Fortunately, the Roman Catholic Church learned its lesson and some great science has come from later Roman Catholic scientists and scholars.
The world will survive creationism.
Sweet dreams and God Bless all. TAD+
One of the minsters, from one of our Christian Churches (the denomination), brought up the new skeleton that was in the news a couple of days ago, Ardi. "Ardi" is short for Ardipithecus ramidus, a 4.4 million year old hominid that predates "Lucy" by about 1.2 million years. Lucy is of the species Australopithicus afarensis, closer to us in the chain of things.
The Christian Church minister was positively gleeful over finding Ardi, for he said, "It shows that we are not descended from the monkeys, something that is in all the Biology books." That was curious, since I have never read a real science Biology textbook that said that we were descended from monkeys. I collect old science books and one of my oldest Biology books is an early 1920s "First Biology" for high school students that says, to quote, "Biology does not teach that humans descended from monkeys." A college text I have does not teach that either. In fact all of the modern books that I do have note that we and the monkeys and the apes come from some long extinct common ancestor. All Ardi does is put that common ancestor more distant, structurally, from us than is Lucy.
What tickled me about the ministers gleefulness was that they were using a 4.4 million year old skeleton to "prove" that man did not come from the monkeys. To them a 4.4 million year skeleton should not exist. These guys are all "young earth" proponents! Even 1 million years ago is questionable, since "everything" was created only 6,000 years ago, in 4004 BCE (according to the creationist timetable).
It struck me that creationist's real fear is in being related to animals like monkeys and apes. If, somehow, it can be shown that there are no monkeys in the family tree, then God's peace will again reign on earth. Maybe the idea of being descended from pond scum is OK, just as long as there are no immoral buffoonish monkeys there! After all, we can't be descended from something that swings from the trees and shows off its private parts in great displays of primate sexuality, can we?
Anyway, these good folk are really stuck in an old paradigm. I think that even if God him-and-her-self were to show up and shout, "Yes, I did it using evolution" they wouldn't believe it, for they have too much invested in a literal point of view. Too bad for them, for modern Biological Science and its offshoot, medicine, are dependent upon the validity of evolutionary fact.
If the creationists were to win "the war" here in the United States, all that would mean is that meaningful scientific and medical progress would shift elsewhere. And if the reformation teaches us anything, it will move elsewhere. For in the 17th Century science left Italian and southern European schools (under the gun of the backward-looking Roman Catholic Church) and moved north to Germany, the Low Countries, and England. Galileo was the end of South European science and Isaac Newton represents the flowering of Northern Science. Fortunately, the Roman Catholic Church learned its lesson and some great science has come from later Roman Catholic scientists and scholars.
The world will survive creationism.
Sweet dreams and God Bless all. TAD+
Saturday, October 3, 2009
What a week!
A really busy week draws to a close. Thank goodness, but, boy, did I enjoy myself!
Today (Saturday) we held out annual Blessing of the Animals. Here is a picture from a couple of years back, but the same folks tend to show up each year.
We do a short service in honor of St. Francis of Assisi, then I bless each of the animals. The big difference between the picture you see above and today was about 35 degrees Fahrenheit! Then it was in the high 80s. Today it was about 57 when we began. My photographer, Bill Smith will send me the photos when he has them finished, and I'll post more here.
Salem has what is called "The Little Egypt Festival" the first weekend of October each year. The story is told that years ago a drought wipped out the corn crop in northern Illinois, but the south got plenty of rain and had a plentiful crop. So the farmers up north hitched up their wagons and came south to get corn. The symbolism matching that event with the Jewish Scripture story of Jacob's sons going to Egypt in a time of famine was evident to all, so this region of Southern Illinois is still known as "Little Egypt."
One event is a large parade. During the parade the folks at St. Thomas give away free glasses of Lemonade - this year we added Hot Chocolate! Here is a shot from three years ago. I'll post this year's pictures (some anyway) when Bill gets them to me.
The fellow in the back row with the sun glasses, Dick Jackson, has since passed away from cancer, but the lady on his left, Dottie Jackson, was with us with her dog, Tess, who got a blessing and has become my new good buddy!I like dogs and regret they Sue and I have never had one, but our two ancient cats would die of heart attacks if we tried to introduce one now. When the two cats (19 and 18 years old) pass on, we'll wait a decent period of time, get the living room refinished and refurnished, then buy a kitten and a puppy at the same time. That way they'll grow up together, not knowing that the other one is a alien being! We'll get the new pets either from our local vet or shelter or from the Pets-Mart in Fairview heights, since they handle many rescued animals.
Tomorrow I get to talk about divorce - that will be fun. But, hey, it's what Mark gave to us for this week.
In the meantime, sweet dreams and God Bless all. TAD+
Friday, October 2, 2009
Looking Glass Playhouse Review
We just got back from attending a production of "The Producers" by the folks at the Looking Glass Playhouse in Lebanon, Illinois. LGP is an all amateur group of folks who put on a number of plays and musicals each year.
This evenings production of Mel Brooks' "The Producers" was superb! For a group of people to get together week after week in rehearsals, then put on an excellent show indicates great dedication to all of the people involved. In this production the two male leads were played by Brian Shreppler, who has been involved with LGP for a number of years, and Seth Ward, a newcomer in his first musical. Brian, as always, was excellent. Seth was the surprise of the night. He has excellent timing and facial expressions that are second to none. His voice was very, very good (an upper range tenor) and his voice carried really well in the theater - no one is wearing a microphone at LGP.
Sue and I enjoyed ourselves tremendously and recommend the Looking Glass Playhouse to anyone who enjoys good entertainment. An added bonus is the frequent opportunity to interact with cast members after the show. That is a really nice benefit.
Sweet dreams, all, and God Bless. TAD+
This evenings production of Mel Brooks' "The Producers" was superb! For a group of people to get together week after week in rehearsals, then put on an excellent show indicates great dedication to all of the people involved. In this production the two male leads were played by Brian Shreppler, who has been involved with LGP for a number of years, and Seth Ward, a newcomer in his first musical. Brian, as always, was excellent. Seth was the surprise of the night. He has excellent timing and facial expressions that are second to none. His voice was very, very good (an upper range tenor) and his voice carried really well in the theater - no one is wearing a microphone at LGP.
Sue and I enjoyed ourselves tremendously and recommend the Looking Glass Playhouse to anyone who enjoys good entertainment. An added bonus is the frequent opportunity to interact with cast members after the show. That is a really nice benefit.
Sweet dreams, all, and God Bless. TAD+
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Look at the following graphic:
George Will, in many of his recent essays, has become an ever louder global warming "nay-sayer." He, like a number of my conservative acquaintances, insist that global warming is a fraud, perpetuated by a liberal cabal of wackos who want to destroy America. Will, in his latest posting, claimed that 1998 was the "hottest year," but that temperatures have been declining ever since. But a closer examination of the data tells a somewhat different story.
Notice, in the graphic, that a short, and relatively small, cooling trend took place from 1991 - 1993. That was in response to the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Phillipines in 1991. In 1998 there was a large peak in the opposite direction. This was in response to the 1998 El Nino. And, of course, 1998 is the year that global-warming deniers pin their hats on. They claim that it has been getting cooler since then. That is incorrect. Even removing those two events from the graphic doesn't make any difference in the long term trend. And it is that long term trend that matters.
Notice that the average temperature wandered above and below the zero degree mark from around 1979 until 1993 (that's because that period was chosen as the benchmark period - it is even more graphic if you look at the data since 1890). But the temperature since 1993 has run above and below a higher temperature by around 0.2 degrees (Centigrade). That doesn't seem like much, but the effect is much higher at the high latitudes (above, say, 60 degrees North Latitude). Which is why the Greenland Ice Cap is melting so much faster than scientists anticipated. It is also why the Arctic Ocean ice is disappearing in the summer months - something that has not happened in the last 150,000 years or so from all indications. And, since higher elevation act like higher latitudes, it is why the California snow pack is melting too early for the animals that depend upon it (including the human animal).
The problem with this kind of temperature increase is that it feeds upon itself in a positive feedback loop. It gets warmer so more water and rock are exposed, which do not reflect heat the way ice does. So then it gets warmer and even more water and rock are exposed, making the effect build upon itself. Scientists speak about trip points in this kind of action, in which a point is reached when "the system" snaps to a new stability - in this case at an even higher temperature than has been proposed before now (previously in the 3 - 5 degree range). No one knows what this new temperature regime will look like, but figures of 6 - 9 degrees Celsius are being discussed. At that point, there is a real chance that ALL of the ice sheets on the planet will melt and the oceans rise by several dozens of feet (before the present Ice Age, the oceans were about 200 feet higher). Most animal life will suffer enormously, since the time to effect evolutionary change is too long to respond to the rapid temperature changes we might yet see.
The global-warming deniers do themselves and humanity no good service by fighting this issue. The science is solid and becoming more certain every month. There is NO chance that some unknown phenomena will come along to recuse us from ourselves. We made this problem with our industrial revolution, the transportation revolution, and our continuing abuse of our environment. The claim that "jobs will be lost" is a "red herring," since the new "green revolution" will create more and better jobs around the globe. At least the Chinese think so, for they are beginning to commit to making major investments in green technology and industry. They are out to "eat our lunch." With people like George Will resisting and impeding change, they may well do it.
Sweet dreams and God Bless. TAD+
George Will, in many of his recent essays, has become an ever louder global warming "nay-sayer." He, like a number of my conservative acquaintances, insist that global warming is a fraud, perpetuated by a liberal cabal of wackos who want to destroy America. Will, in his latest posting, claimed that 1998 was the "hottest year," but that temperatures have been declining ever since. But a closer examination of the data tells a somewhat different story.
Notice, in the graphic, that a short, and relatively small, cooling trend took place from 1991 - 1993. That was in response to the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Phillipines in 1991. In 1998 there was a large peak in the opposite direction. This was in response to the 1998 El Nino. And, of course, 1998 is the year that global-warming deniers pin their hats on. They claim that it has been getting cooler since then. That is incorrect. Even removing those two events from the graphic doesn't make any difference in the long term trend. And it is that long term trend that matters.
Notice that the average temperature wandered above and below the zero degree mark from around 1979 until 1993 (that's because that period was chosen as the benchmark period - it is even more graphic if you look at the data since 1890). But the temperature since 1993 has run above and below a higher temperature by around 0.2 degrees (Centigrade). That doesn't seem like much, but the effect is much higher at the high latitudes (above, say, 60 degrees North Latitude). Which is why the Greenland Ice Cap is melting so much faster than scientists anticipated. It is also why the Arctic Ocean ice is disappearing in the summer months - something that has not happened in the last 150,000 years or so from all indications. And, since higher elevation act like higher latitudes, it is why the California snow pack is melting too early for the animals that depend upon it (including the human animal).
The problem with this kind of temperature increase is that it feeds upon itself in a positive feedback loop. It gets warmer so more water and rock are exposed, which do not reflect heat the way ice does. So then it gets warmer and even more water and rock are exposed, making the effect build upon itself. Scientists speak about trip points in this kind of action, in which a point is reached when "the system" snaps to a new stability - in this case at an even higher temperature than has been proposed before now (previously in the 3 - 5 degree range). No one knows what this new temperature regime will look like, but figures of 6 - 9 degrees Celsius are being discussed. At that point, there is a real chance that ALL of the ice sheets on the planet will melt and the oceans rise by several dozens of feet (before the present Ice Age, the oceans were about 200 feet higher). Most animal life will suffer enormously, since the time to effect evolutionary change is too long to respond to the rapid temperature changes we might yet see.
The global-warming deniers do themselves and humanity no good service by fighting this issue. The science is solid and becoming more certain every month. There is NO chance that some unknown phenomena will come along to recuse us from ourselves. We made this problem with our industrial revolution, the transportation revolution, and our continuing abuse of our environment. The claim that "jobs will be lost" is a "red herring," since the new "green revolution" will create more and better jobs around the globe. At least the Chinese think so, for they are beginning to commit to making major investments in green technology and industry. They are out to "eat our lunch." With people like George Will resisting and impeding change, they may well do it.
Sweet dreams and God Bless. TAD+
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)