HIMALAYAN GLACIERS

updated 5:25 a.m. EDT, Mon October 5, 2009

(CNN) — The glaciers in the Himalayas are receding quicker than those in other parts of the world and could disappear altogether by 2035 according to the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report.

Wed Jan 20, 7:30 am ET

GENEVA – A U.N. warning that Himalayan glaciers were melting faster than any other place in the world and may be gone by 2035 was not backed up by science, U.N. climate experts said Wednesday — an admission that could energize climate change critics.

The Himalayan glacier claim, made in the group’s voluminous, Nobel-winning report, was little noticed until The Sunday Times said the projection seemed to be based on a news report.

      How timely for me to restart my BLOG today and the article that I posted earlier today.

     This is exactly what I have been talking about and the reason that I started my BLOG two years ago.

(Readers, please check my post of earlier today.)

    Before you dive off the cliff, know how deep the water is.

   For as long as I can remember I have heard people say “Don’t discuss politics or religion”.That makes sense because both are subjective issues and people usually adhere to religion as a ‘faith-based system of salvation’. Faith is the sticking point.

People do not change unless given a reason and since the principles of a religion do not change significantly people continue to believe in their deities. Theists, of just about any religion, use the argument “it could not have been otherwise”.

People usually stay with the religion of their parents until an event in their lives causes them to question why they are of a particular faith. People do not simply change from one religion to another. They must first drop their original beliefs because of disagreement with their church leaders, a change in church policy or they dislike someone in the congregation so much that they are uncomfortable being there.

Politics, on the other hand is also subjective but the results of politicians are generally visible. The process may not be transparent but the results of the politicians actions are.

I have tried to avoid these two topics in my articles when I started writing them a year and a half ago but I wish to remind people of what happens when you ‘owe’ something to someone.

If someone loans you money they expect it to be repaid.

I believe people borrow money for two primary reasons.

The usual reason is that they need to borrow because they have mismanaged their affairs and are in debt.

The second is that they want the money to invest in a new home, car or business.

In the former case it is expected that the borrower will modify his or her habits so that they can avoid actions which caused their original financial problem.

The individual who loaned the money expects that assurance and so monitors  the debtor’s behavior, and if necessary, attempts to control it.

In politics no one is elected who is an unknown therefore to advertise a candidate’s attributes requires money. We have seen recently that even elected positions that are of minor significance require ever increasing amounts of money.

This money comes from campaign contributions so the politician who receives it owes something to the contributor. The larger the contribution, the greater the debt.

Whoever loans you money essentially controls you. If it’s an individual or bank they need to know that the course that you are pursuing will guarantee that they will get their money back.

If you expect a handout from the government then you owe the government and they receive their payment through taxes. If you owe the government, it can tell you how you must live your life and how much of your money that they will take to make that happen.

We are caught up in a huge game.
The people at the top make–and keep– the most money in a Socialistic system.
That seems to be the game plan, a Socialistic ‘One World’ system of currency and governmental control by a few people. Perhaps it will be those few who have the greatest influence on the United Nations organization.

Every time the Democrats get elected, they push us a little closer toward Socialism.
When the Conservatives get back in, it’s like a ‘ratchet’–it never goes back. They never undo what the Liberals have done.

This is not to excuse all Republicans either. They want to get as many votes as possible so they must satisfy the desires of the masses with hand-outs which also is a step toward Socialism.

In short, no matter who gets elected in this country, Democrat or Republican, you can expect Socialism in the end. It is only a matter of who gets us there the fastest.

The government will decide what the individual is entitled to and control that through taxes and the redistribution of wealth.

That is, except for the privileged few at the top.

CORD                  1929-1937

CROSLEY           1939-1952

DUESENBERG   1913-1926

ESSEX                  1919-1932

HUDSON             1910-1957

KAISER               1945-1956

NASH                   1916-1957

PACKARD           1899-1958

STUDEBAKER   1902-1966

When these fine American cars could no longer compete in the market, they simply went out of business.

Where was their  Uncle Sam when they needed him? No one bailed them out

When the horse and buggy could no longer compete with the automobile, the buggy manufacturers closed their doors also.

The United States did not collapse.

If a company is unable to produce any product competitively then it should fail.

Subsidizing failure seems to be a trend in the US today but it creates the expectation of continuity in enterprises that make incompetent decisions.

There is a connection between conservatism and greed but it is not an absolute “A=B”.

One can be ‘conservative’ (as I am) and not be greedy (as I am not).
Greed stems from conservatism but is not necessarily the end product. Too much conservatism is greed.

In other words, I want to be self-sufficient and in so doing I must accumulate enough of the  ‘implements’ to do so. In primitive times this meant arrowheads, wood,  skins and dried meat.

Today it is money. I feel money is a vehicle (a bartering medium) that will allow me to trade for those things that lead to my survival.
It has never been my goal to accumulate more than I feel is necessary to meet the goal of survival in a modern world– a world of taxes and shelter and fuel (energy) and transportation and food and some left over for pleasure.
Without some pleasure life becomes merely existence.

Those who accumulate simply with that as a goal are indeed greedy and that breeds resentment in those who are truly deficient.
This leads to extreme ‘liberalism’  using the vehicle of guilt to take from the truly greedy….and give to perhaps the less greedy.

How much is ’sufficient’? Who evaluates how much pleasure one is entitled to?
How much money do the apparently  deficient allocate to pleasure that gives them the appearance of insufficient means of survival?

My grandfather’s favorite expression was, “Moderation in all things.”

In short be conservative (self-sufficient) but not greedy.

   The reader I refer to has a site definitely worth visiting: www.blog4brains.com.

   I guess that’s what it takes. We are simply humans and it seems that once we get into a rut we tend stay there. It is the easy way out. Someone needs to poke us with a stick.

   Anyway, the reader mentioned that we have a neglected freedom, the freedom to fail.

  Our present American culture has become very–I won’t call it success oriented–but ‘anti-failure’ oriented.

  I first experienced this in 1968 when I had moved into a new neighborhood and a neighbor invited me to his home for a visit.

   The basement had been made into a very impressive game room and while touring the house his young son challenged me to a game of table tennis.

   The boy was very good but I managed to win a very close game.

   Both the kid and the father significantly cooled and the visit ended fairly quickly.

   When we went outside, the father said angrily, “You were supposed to let him win!”

   Having been a Boy Scout, an Assistant Scoutmaster, an Explorer Advisor and a Cub Scout Committee Chairman I was very surprised by that attitude.

  During my entire life I had been conditioned to survive and one only survives by giving everything in you to every task. The concept of intentional failure was beyond my comprehension.

   Since then we have seen the system of survival replaced by the system of ‘preservation of self-esteem’

  School children are not permitted to fail. No matter how poor their performance they still graduate from high school barely able to read, write a meaningful sentence or give you back the correct change.

  We do have the ‘freedom to fail’. If you manage your personal finances or your business in a manner in which you cannot survive then it is necessary that you fail.

  I am fairly certain that if you cannot compete in business or in the academic fields in China, India or Russia then you have the freedom to fail.

  No one will bail you out if you are a proven loser.

  Why should they?

   If we continue to place a higher value on  self-esteem than on performance, we, as a country, can expect to fail. It is, after all, one of our freedoms.

“I owed the IRS $10,000 but I went to the firm of Joe Cheat and Associates and I only had to pay back $400.”

This, in my opinion, was the start. People tried to weasel out of their obligations in a semi-acceptable manner.

If you owe the IRS taxes it’s because you made the money. It’s as simple as that.

The problem, however, is the honest guy who sees that ad over and over again starts to wonder why he/she doesn’t do the same.

We have some wonderful examples of our ‘Big-League’ politicians who are doing this on a grand scale.

“Hell, why waste time with Joe Cheat and Associates, I’ll just bypass the middleman and simply not pay my taxes?” 

No one wants to voluntarily give away their hard-earned money but that happens to be the system that we live under.

If you want government services you must pay for them. That’s why we have a system of taxation. To do otherwise is to take advantage of the person who is willing to work and play by the rules.

Remember, money doesn’t come cheap. You trade hours of your life for a paycheck.

You have made a decision to swap part of your life for dollars.

How many hours of your life are you willing to give to someone who would rather go fishing or play golf instead of working because he/she figured out a system to coast at your expense?

   We also know with certainty that land which was deep under the oceans is now the tops of some of the highest mountains.

   The planet and life on the planet are in constant flux. Species that had existed in the past are no longer here and their absence is not because of man but because they either could not adapt in their present form or they adapted by changing their physiology to conform to the new conditions.

   A couple of days ago it was reported that more than usual dead baby penguins were washing up on the shores of Brazil. The article stated that biologist Erli Costa of Rio de Janeiro’s Federal University feels that this is the result of changing weather patterns around Antarctica caused by global warming which is causing rougher seas and stronger currents than the baby penguins are able to cope with.

    A food scarcity caused by over-fishing may be forcing the young penguins to swim further from shore and they are unable to out-swim the currents.

   What will be the consequences of this situation?

The stronger young penguins will survive and contribute to the gene pool of the remaining penguins. Antarctic penguins will evolve into a stronger breed.

   There is historical evidence of this rapid evolution as is seen in the Hawaiian people. The indigenous Hawaiian was a very powerful and large person of great endurance and very acute eyesight.

   Those were the characteristics necessary for survival by paddling a canoe across great distances of open ocean. To get to Hawaii these people had to paddle against the Pacific North Equatorial Current, had to travel long distances without food and had to be able to see the tiny specks of clouds in the distance that formed over islands.

   The open ocean traveler without those characteristics perished just as the weaker Antarctic penguin of today.

   That is the way of life. If the Earth warms, those people who can survive the climate change will survive and reproduce. When the Earth cools again, the process will reverse itself. This has always been the pattern and will continue to be so in the future.

   Humanity will not simply disappear.

   There is one cold hard fact that alters the natural selection of those who contribute to the gene pool. Today, through emotion, humanity is interfering with the process.

   We are promoting “survival of the weakest” by spending millions of dollars keeping babies alive who are too weak to survive on their own.

   That may sound like a cruel and insensitive statement but it is nevertheless true.

   These infants, who are too unsuited for life on the planet, will be contributing to the gene pool and eventually we may be the cause of our own extinction rather than climate change.

   I know that this is a cold statement but it is true.

   Remember, that is the reason why I write these articles.

Truth– rather than emotion, politics or prejudice–will ensure our economic, cultural and physical survival.

“Do I need it?”

“Will I use it?”

“Can I afford it?”

That is how I have managed my life’s finances.

There are obviously times during one’s life when we buy things that we don’t really need but those are what makes life fun. These are the frivolous items that we buy or the trips that we take simply for pleasure.

However, before I spend the money I always ask myself, “Can I afford it?”

I answer that question honestly every time and often forego the pleasure out of a sense of fiscal responsibility.

In my previous post, “Black Plastic”, I questioned the necessity of the plastic sheet at construction sites.

To date, one person has agreed with me and one has misunderstood my article.

I did not blame Saudi Arabia for our misguided use of polyethylene.

If readers go back to the beginning of my articles they will find that my entire purpose in writing these articles is to question actions based on emotion rather than reason.

I assume the intended purpose of the plastic is to protect the environment. However, it does not and its use amounts to “Fiscal Irresponsibility”.

In short, we don’t need it and we can’t afford it.

The US has been in a continuously increasing trade deficit and purchasing polyethylene from a foreign country worsens the situation.

Polyethylene is a petroleum-based product. It is my opinion that crude oil, which we are told is a limited resource, is being diverted to the production of a product that we don’t need and can’t afford.

For a number of years I have been going to the same resort in Jamaica. Quite a few years ago I met the man who picks up trash and plastic cups from the beach, arranges the beach lounges and chairs for the next day and then rakes the beach.

He’s a Rastafarian as is his father and was his grandfather. They eat vegetables and some fish but not meat. They don’t believe in violence or war. They don’t drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes but they do smoke marijuana. (A topic that I have planned to discuss in a future post).

He’s an interesting old guy who leaves the resort at the end of the day and walks to his home in the mountains.

He has been doing this for a long time. He told me that he had to cut off his ‘dreads’ that had reached to his knees in order to get this job.

I returned home yesterday bringing with me an interesting topic.

While sitting on the beach near the end of the day Pablito noticed that I started to pick up a plastic cup not too far from my lounge.

“No mon, leave it. I pick it up.”
I told him that it wasn’t mine and that I wouldn’t leave a cup on the beach.

“I know,” he said. ” Inside you Rasta too. But if everyone was like you who didn’t leave trash on the beach, I would have no job and my family would go hungry.”

Slobs do, after all, have a place in ‘the order of the universe”.