Inter-Galactic Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, neophyte domestic terrorist
Re: Domestic terrorism
Jay Nixon, Governor of Missouri, recently issued a secret report to law-enforcement and related agencies in his state, through the Missouri Information Analysis Center, which smears about two-thirds of the population of the country, naming them (us, me) as potential domestic terrorists.
The list includes: Ron Paul supporters, people who have knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, and people who display political bumper stickers as potential domestic terrorists.
The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists, [and] the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order.
Interestingly, the governor failed to mention Jihadists, Islamic Radicals, Bader Meinhoff, the Golden Path, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the KKK, the Black Panthers, the IRA, Hamas, Hezbollah, and about two hundred others—I checked.
Do you believe this guy? According to Jay’s definition, I am a domestic terrorist on nearly every count. I own guns, I own gold, we display the flag on every appropriate occasion, I like Ron Paul, I have a nodding acquaintance with the Constitution, I understand that I am in fact a member of Nevada’s militia, I oppose both the North American Union and the New World Order, I belong to a “fundamentalist” religious organization, I listen to talk radio (while not mentioned in the report, I feel this was merely an oversight) and I like the occasional bumper sticker—my favorite of which is “I loathe and despise redundancy,” which I saw stuck to both sides of a bumper. Nice, huh?
I am surprised to find myself on a secret list, if not by name then certainly by temperament. I think of myself as pretty patriotic, then find out that the “patriot movement” is on the list. Bother. Now all of you will have to watch me night and day, which makes your jobs harder since you were already tasked to watch for anything unusual, out of the ordinary, or swarthy.
My one consolation is that I am in good company, which includes George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and the other founders, all of whom were radicals, insurgents, and treasonous. They were not terrorists, however. Not in the sense of my own above mentioned list which only includes people who kill innocents at random for the purpose of causing actual terror.
The Governor is one of many well-intentioned idiots who have misplaced his sanity in favor of political correctness. I am confident that the Bush administration did not prevent several dozen actual, active, terrorist plots from occurring in this country over the last seven years by keeping a sharp eye on flag-waving, bumper-sticker wearing, constitutionalists. But that’s just me.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Inter-Galactic Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt Crypto-Planetologist
Re: Malthusism . . . again
Food and energy shortages will create 'perfect storm', says Prof John Beddington
Here we go again. This is the headline in the UK Telegraph today. Professor Beddington is predicting doom and gloom over yet another resource-crisis.
The demand for resources will create a crisis with dire consequences, Prof Beddington predicts.
He gives us until 2030 before the ceiling collapses.
Demand for food and energy will jump 50 per cent by 2030 and for fresh water by 30 per cent, as the global population tops 8.3 billion, he is due to tell a conference in London.
This is exactly what Thomas Malthus told the British Government in the early 1800’s. His theory is famous and is being proven wrong consistently. The idea simply will not die. Basically, both Malthus and his latest acolyte, Beddington, preach the same gospel; that rising populations will always outstrip our ability to grow food, find potable water and mine resources. And yet, since the industrial revolution, the exact opposite has consistently occurred. None of these prophets of doom—and there have been a lot of them—have ever taken into consideration the other side of the coin. Only R.B. Fuller had bothered to do that, and his conclusions have proven accurate since the thirties. They are this: Humans will always, through innovation and discovery, find ways to be more efficient in all they do. His thesis is that as organisms, our role in the universe is order, organization, which is anti-entropic and allows us to continually do ever-more with ever-less. Moore’s law is the perfect example; every 18 months integrated circuits go through another revolution, doubling the number of transistors, increasing speed and efficiency, and dropping in price. During Malthus’s time one farmer could feed about ten people. Today—in the First World, one farmer feeds thousands, in the States its hundreds of thousands. The planet has enormous stores of fresh water—we just have to have the will to go after it. We plant more trees than we harvest every year, worldwide. And on and on. Fuller does not abolish the many challenges we face any more that Malthus predicts our demise from them, but the fact is, as a species, we face them and are geniuses at overcoming them.
There are things that could destroy us, destroy life. Catastrophic events beyond our control, like errant comets and gamma ray bursts within a thousand light years. (but they would have to be aimed right at us) Political posturing, bickering, and partisanship can certainly do it, but lack of resources never will. We have the whole solar system to exploit, and yes, that is the correct word—look it up. Nuclear holocaust will not do it—there are not enough bombs in the world to destroy human life, much less all life, despite the continuing rhetoric contrary to that opinion. One major volcanic eruption has more destructive force than the entire arsenal of nuclear weapons. And personally, I don’t think radical changes in the global climate will ever destroy us either. It could get bad, change things, kill millions, but we’d survive and eventually thrive again.
Despite centuries of being proven wrong, the naysayers like Malthus and Ehrlich and their ilk still insist on spouting their silly nonsense, and they make names for themselves and often lots of money from it. But the human race prevails. The human experience continues to validate itself, despite everything we try that screws things up. Think positive. Be reasonable. Be a good influence in your sphere and husband the resources for which you are responsible. If we all do that we will create a veritable paradise. And we will do it without having to compromise our standards of living—maybe our willful pursuit of hedonistic pleasure, but that won’t be a bad thing, will it?
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt Crypto-Planetologist
Re: Malthusism . . . again
Food and energy shortages will create 'perfect storm', says Prof John Beddington
Here we go again. This is the headline in the UK Telegraph today. Professor Beddington is predicting doom and gloom over yet another resource-crisis.
The demand for resources will create a crisis with dire consequences, Prof Beddington predicts.
He gives us until 2030 before the ceiling collapses.
Demand for food and energy will jump 50 per cent by 2030 and for fresh water by 30 per cent, as the global population tops 8.3 billion, he is due to tell a conference in London.
This is exactly what Thomas Malthus told the British Government in the early 1800’s. His theory is famous and is being proven wrong consistently. The idea simply will not die. Basically, both Malthus and his latest acolyte, Beddington, preach the same gospel; that rising populations will always outstrip our ability to grow food, find potable water and mine resources. And yet, since the industrial revolution, the exact opposite has consistently occurred. None of these prophets of doom—and there have been a lot of them—have ever taken into consideration the other side of the coin. Only R.B. Fuller had bothered to do that, and his conclusions have proven accurate since the thirties. They are this: Humans will always, through innovation and discovery, find ways to be more efficient in all they do. His thesis is that as organisms, our role in the universe is order, organization, which is anti-entropic and allows us to continually do ever-more with ever-less. Moore’s law is the perfect example; every 18 months integrated circuits go through another revolution, doubling the number of transistors, increasing speed and efficiency, and dropping in price. During Malthus’s time one farmer could feed about ten people. Today—in the First World, one farmer feeds thousands, in the States its hundreds of thousands. The planet has enormous stores of fresh water—we just have to have the will to go after it. We plant more trees than we harvest every year, worldwide. And on and on. Fuller does not abolish the many challenges we face any more that Malthus predicts our demise from them, but the fact is, as a species, we face them and are geniuses at overcoming them.
There are things that could destroy us, destroy life. Catastrophic events beyond our control, like errant comets and gamma ray bursts within a thousand light years. (but they would have to be aimed right at us) Political posturing, bickering, and partisanship can certainly do it, but lack of resources never will. We have the whole solar system to exploit, and yes, that is the correct word—look it up. Nuclear holocaust will not do it—there are not enough bombs in the world to destroy human life, much less all life, despite the continuing rhetoric contrary to that opinion. One major volcanic eruption has more destructive force than the entire arsenal of nuclear weapons. And personally, I don’t think radical changes in the global climate will ever destroy us either. It could get bad, change things, kill millions, but we’d survive and eventually thrive again.
Despite centuries of being proven wrong, the naysayers like Malthus and Ehrlich and their ilk still insist on spouting their silly nonsense, and they make names for themselves and often lots of money from it. But the human race prevails. The human experience continues to validate itself, despite everything we try that screws things up. Think positive. Be reasonable. Be a good influence in your sphere and husband the resources for which you are responsible. If we all do that we will create a veritable paradise. And we will do it without having to compromise our standards of living—maybe our willful pursuit of hedonistic pleasure, but that won’t be a bad thing, will it?
IGM The spendulus Package, AIG, etc
Inter-Galactic Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, sore loser
Re: AIG, the spendulus package, other oddities
I had something in mind when I started this, but the sheer magnitude of topics, the plethora of criticisms available, makes it difficult to know where to begin. So I’ll just do what I always do; write whatever comes to mind. I suppose we’ve all been following this AIG bonus story and how congress and the president are screaming about the money being given away to employees after AIG received billions of dollars in bail-out money. Fair enough. I have always been skeptical of the sums of money given to CEO’s and top executives. It makes one suspicious that rather than being a reward for excellent work, it is just a system for spreading the wealth—which is a plank in the current administrations platform. They just don’t like it when they don’t get their cut. It should be done ‘democratically’, not through a good-old-boy system. It looks like Ed Libby is doing his best to save that company, but with all this help from the government AIG is doomed.
I do have a problem or two with the current righteous indignation being displayed by some of the people on Capitol Hill. Barney Frank is calling for investigations, indictments, and is working on a bill that would require those at AIG receiving bonuses to return it—as if Congress has any right to do such a thing in the private sector—like it or not, AIG has done nothing illegal, or even unusual. Another bill, already endorsed by our own Harry “dingy harry” Reid, would require a tax on all corporate bonuses of 90%--yes someone is actually introducing that. And you though the whole “socialism” thing was just hyperbole.
By the way, everyone knew three months ago that AIG, long before they were given bail-out money, was going to be handing out the bonuses—bail-out or not—because they told everyone about it and that they were contractually obligated to do so. Remember contracts? Remember how upset we were when the state of Nevada decided to cut our salaries this year despite our contract? So now they are all lining up to posture about their indignation. This almost rises to the level of hypocrisy . . . .
And what about all those people (3 that I know of) who were working for Fanny and Freddie and got their shares of 100 million dollars in bonuses before they were tagged to be part of the current administration? Shall we mention Barney and Harry and Chris and Nancy again, and how they were knowingly culpable in propping up Freddie and Fanny long after it was known—and they had been warned—that those lending institutions were going to fail? (We will not mention that criminal Bush and his administrations repeated attempts to get someone to do something about the impending bursting of the bubble).
Then we have our President comparing Tim Geitner to our first Sec Tres., Alexander Hamilton. That took guts. Isn’t Geitner the one who couldn’t figure out what he owed taxes on? And got that huge bonus from Freddie and/or Fanny? Who else would you pick to run the Treasury? Al Capone comes to mind; at least he’s dead and couldn’t do any damage.
All this outrage and anger and name-calling by congress is laughable. They caused the problem in the first place, and are making it worse now. It takes a lot of chutzpah to shoot someone in the head in front of witnesses, then call a press conference demanding an investigation and vowing to find out who is responsible. And I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that passing a law requiring a 90% tax on bonuses isn’t going to help fix the problem.
A new poll has more people saying they would vote Republican over Democrat for the first time in over two years—that didn’t take long. It’s only by two points, but the change is significant all things considered. Congress had better watch their backs, if you know what I mean. And now they’re crying over all the pork in the spendulus package—you know, the one nobody had time to read—demanding investigations, etc., when it’s their pork. Is anyone else reminded of the Keystone Cops in all of this? It’s going to be fun watching what is rapidly becoming the country’s most amateurish leadership in history as they continue to break their own records for incompetence and ignorance. Not that any of us are keeping score.
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, sore loser
Re: AIG, the spendulus package, other oddities
I had something in mind when I started this, but the sheer magnitude of topics, the plethora of criticisms available, makes it difficult to know where to begin. So I’ll just do what I always do; write whatever comes to mind. I suppose we’ve all been following this AIG bonus story and how congress and the president are screaming about the money being given away to employees after AIG received billions of dollars in bail-out money. Fair enough. I have always been skeptical of the sums of money given to CEO’s and top executives. It makes one suspicious that rather than being a reward for excellent work, it is just a system for spreading the wealth—which is a plank in the current administrations platform. They just don’t like it when they don’t get their cut. It should be done ‘democratically’, not through a good-old-boy system. It looks like Ed Libby is doing his best to save that company, but with all this help from the government AIG is doomed.
I do have a problem or two with the current righteous indignation being displayed by some of the people on Capitol Hill. Barney Frank is calling for investigations, indictments, and is working on a bill that would require those at AIG receiving bonuses to return it—as if Congress has any right to do such a thing in the private sector—like it or not, AIG has done nothing illegal, or even unusual. Another bill, already endorsed by our own Harry “dingy harry” Reid, would require a tax on all corporate bonuses of 90%--yes someone is actually introducing that. And you though the whole “socialism” thing was just hyperbole.
By the way, everyone knew three months ago that AIG, long before they were given bail-out money, was going to be handing out the bonuses—bail-out or not—because they told everyone about it and that they were contractually obligated to do so. Remember contracts? Remember how upset we were when the state of Nevada decided to cut our salaries this year despite our contract? So now they are all lining up to posture about their indignation. This almost rises to the level of hypocrisy . . . .
And what about all those people (3 that I know of) who were working for Fanny and Freddie and got their shares of 100 million dollars in bonuses before they were tagged to be part of the current administration? Shall we mention Barney and Harry and Chris and Nancy again, and how they were knowingly culpable in propping up Freddie and Fanny long after it was known—and they had been warned—that those lending institutions were going to fail? (We will not mention that criminal Bush and his administrations repeated attempts to get someone to do something about the impending bursting of the bubble).
Then we have our President comparing Tim Geitner to our first Sec Tres., Alexander Hamilton. That took guts. Isn’t Geitner the one who couldn’t figure out what he owed taxes on? And got that huge bonus from Freddie and/or Fanny? Who else would you pick to run the Treasury? Al Capone comes to mind; at least he’s dead and couldn’t do any damage.
All this outrage and anger and name-calling by congress is laughable. They caused the problem in the first place, and are making it worse now. It takes a lot of chutzpah to shoot someone in the head in front of witnesses, then call a press conference demanding an investigation and vowing to find out who is responsible. And I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict that passing a law requiring a 90% tax on bonuses isn’t going to help fix the problem.
A new poll has more people saying they would vote Republican over Democrat for the first time in over two years—that didn’t take long. It’s only by two points, but the change is significant all things considered. Congress had better watch their backs, if you know what I mean. And now they’re crying over all the pork in the spendulus package—you know, the one nobody had time to read—demanding investigations, etc., when it’s their pork. Is anyone else reminded of the Keystone Cops in all of this? It’s going to be fun watching what is rapidly becoming the country’s most amateurish leadership in history as they continue to break their own records for incompetence and ignorance. Not that any of us are keeping score.
IGM Pending Environmental Doom
Inter-Galactic-Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crypto-Glaciologist
Re: Pending Environmental Doom
In an article last night I found an interesting claim. It was on some site called Yourstateline.com, which I’ve never heard of and probably didn’t want to, but the headline intrigued me. It says:
Rise in Sea Temp Could Melt W. Antartic Ice Sheet
The more astute among us will notice they misspelled ‘Antarctic’. We all misspell stuff all the time but one would think that a commercial website headline might have been spell-checked.
The first line of the article says the following: (Oslo) -- A nine degree rise in sea temperature could melt the West Antarctic ice sheet.
Naturally my curiosity was piqued since no one has been talking about multi-degree ocean-temp. rises since Al “Captain Planet” Gore and his spurious documentary debut. I thought, “do these people know how long a nine-degree spike in ocean temperature would take?” Then they told me—the process would take “thousands of years”. So . . . what’s the point of telling us that? This is a non story. Yes, if the Antarctic ice cap were to melt (thousands of years from now due to a completely hypothetical warming trend) it would change the landscape of the planet and rearrange the coastlines globally. So what? Geologically speaking, that happens all the time.
But then the entire debacle-of-a-story became clear in the last line of the brief “article.”
The nine degree trigger for collapse is based on a computer model.
They do love their computer models, don’t they? (Actually, I do too, I just can’t help making fun of them when they take this stuff so seriously.)
Anyway, take a breath and relax. There is no imminent danger of the Ross Ice Shelf disappearing. At least not for the next four years—it wouldn’t dare vanish on Obama’s watch.
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crypto-Glaciologist
Re: Pending Environmental Doom
In an article last night I found an interesting claim. It was on some site called Yourstateline.com, which I’ve never heard of and probably didn’t want to, but the headline intrigued me. It says:
Rise in Sea Temp Could Melt W. Antartic Ice Sheet
The more astute among us will notice they misspelled ‘Antarctic’. We all misspell stuff all the time but one would think that a commercial website headline might have been spell-checked.
The first line of the article says the following: (Oslo) -- A nine degree rise in sea temperature could melt the West Antarctic ice sheet.
Naturally my curiosity was piqued since no one has been talking about multi-degree ocean-temp. rises since Al “Captain Planet” Gore and his spurious documentary debut. I thought, “do these people know how long a nine-degree spike in ocean temperature would take?” Then they told me—the process would take “thousands of years”. So . . . what’s the point of telling us that? This is a non story. Yes, if the Antarctic ice cap were to melt (thousands of years from now due to a completely hypothetical warming trend) it would change the landscape of the planet and rearrange the coastlines globally. So what? Geologically speaking, that happens all the time.
But then the entire debacle-of-a-story became clear in the last line of the brief “article.”
The nine degree trigger for collapse is based on a computer model.
They do love their computer models, don’t they? (Actually, I do too, I just can’t help making fun of them when they take this stuff so seriously.)
Anyway, take a breath and relax. There is no imminent danger of the Ross Ice Shelf disappearing. At least not for the next four years—it wouldn’t dare vanish on Obama’s watch.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
IGM Quantum Consciousness
Inter-Galactic Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crypto-Cybernetic-Quantum Physicist
Re: Quantum Consciousness
We are all very excited around here because of a recent announcement from Roger Penrose (who I believe is a Nobel Laureate in Physics) and anesthesiologist Stuart Hamerhoff, whom I’ve never heard of but is apparently a gas-passer. These too illuminates have come up with a theory about human consciousness they call Orchestrated Objective Reduction” which involves research into why we are conscious, self-aware (a relative term at best) individuals. I will not attempt to explain the theory. It is complicated. However, the article in Physorg.com has provided a handy paragraph by way of explanation which I will here include. Only Mr. Sammons and Mr. Isle and Mr. Phillips—and of course Mrs. Bhagat—have a hope of understanding it.
The theory suggests that microtubules, which are structural components inside cells, might function as cellular quantum computing elements. Inside the microtubules, coherence among quantum superpositions is maintained until the wave function collapses. Normally, a wave function collapses due to a measurement (i.e., interaction of the system and its environment), but here the collapse is postulated not to occur until the quantum superpositions become physically separated within spacetime geometry, called “objective reduction.” When an area of quantum coherence collapses, an instant of consciousness occurs.
Remember those wonderful days of yesteryear, when science suggested with confidence bordering on hubris that the human brain was irreducible, and that no comparison could be made to something as mundane as a computer, etc.? Now we have “cellular quantum computing elements” cropping up in our heads. Good grief. We go on with another incomprehensible quote:
The physical cause of the coherent activity within the microtubules, as Penrose and Hamerhoff suggest, could be Fröhlich condensates. Proposed by physicist Herbert Fröhlich in 1968, Fröhlich condensates are similar to Bose-Einstein condensates in that both are systems with the unique collective property of macroscopic quantum coherence. In Fröhlich condensation, several vibrating oscillators can achieve a highly ordered condensed state, vibrating in resonance. Specifically, nearly all the vibrations occur in-phase at the Fröhlich condensate’s lowest frequency.
They tell us all this in order to tell us this: It turns out that the Fröhlich Condensate is not a candidate for this theory because after forty years of trying really hard, no one has managed to make or find one. They require high temperatures in order to exist. I was afraid to find out how high. (Bose-Einstein requires absolute zero.)
I have been aware of the Bose-Einstein condensate for years because it has become a staple of sorts in science fiction novels. I may have mentioned it a few times in some of my own in fact. It is a fifth state of matter—solid, liquid, gas, plasma, and condensate. Never heard of the Fröhlich condensate until today, which is very exciting except for it not currently existing. What is fascinating here is the attempt to explain consciousness in terms of quantum computing components. Sadly, yet another theory has failed. I’m sure it comes as no surprise that I have an alternative one ready and waiting.
Let us suppose, for the sake of our discussion, that there is a substance, or material in the universe which contains, as an inherent aspect or characteristic, consciousness, or intelligence. We will call this material “spirit”. On some level currently unknown, but sans “cellular quantum computing elements” , this material entity connects with the corporeal human body. While this “spirit” material is physical—actual substance—it is of a nature so refined that it cannot as yet be detected with current technology. It is this form, complete and independent its own right, that contains consciousness and imbues the brain and body with its intelligence as well as its animation. The “spirit” material exists prior to, and independent of, the corporeal body and enters or connects with the body some time prior to birth, which is why researches are having such a difficult time finding what we call “mind.” The material requires neither extreme heat or cold to exist. If we were to replace our term “spirit” with a more secular-sounding label, such as “ectoplasmic construct” or “entangled-Foam Matrix” or “trans-dimensional condensate”, scientists would gleefully add my theory to the others already accepted—despite no evidence whatsoever—by the scientific community. Many fine grants could be won, experiments could be added to the schedule for the LHC, and another generation of researches living off the governments teat would be able to earn a living in their chosen fields. This would help to stimulate the economy and bring us back to our rightful place at kings of the hill in the world of R&D. Now I ask you; where’s the down-side to this?
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crypto-Cybernetic-Quantum Physicist
Re: Quantum Consciousness
We are all very excited around here because of a recent announcement from Roger Penrose (who I believe is a Nobel Laureate in Physics) and anesthesiologist Stuart Hamerhoff, whom I’ve never heard of but is apparently a gas-passer. These too illuminates have come up with a theory about human consciousness they call Orchestrated Objective Reduction” which involves research into why we are conscious, self-aware (a relative term at best) individuals. I will not attempt to explain the theory. It is complicated. However, the article in Physorg.com has provided a handy paragraph by way of explanation which I will here include. Only Mr. Sammons and Mr. Isle and Mr. Phillips—and of course Mrs. Bhagat—have a hope of understanding it.
The theory suggests that microtubules, which are structural components inside cells, might function as cellular quantum computing elements. Inside the microtubules, coherence among quantum superpositions is maintained until the wave function collapses. Normally, a wave function collapses due to a measurement (i.e., interaction of the system and its environment), but here the collapse is postulated not to occur until the quantum superpositions become physically separated within spacetime geometry, called “objective reduction.” When an area of quantum coherence collapses, an instant of consciousness occurs.
Remember those wonderful days of yesteryear, when science suggested with confidence bordering on hubris that the human brain was irreducible, and that no comparison could be made to something as mundane as a computer, etc.? Now we have “cellular quantum computing elements” cropping up in our heads. Good grief. We go on with another incomprehensible quote:
The physical cause of the coherent activity within the microtubules, as Penrose and Hamerhoff suggest, could be Fröhlich condensates. Proposed by physicist Herbert Fröhlich in 1968, Fröhlich condensates are similar to Bose-Einstein condensates in that both are systems with the unique collective property of macroscopic quantum coherence. In Fröhlich condensation, several vibrating oscillators can achieve a highly ordered condensed state, vibrating in resonance. Specifically, nearly all the vibrations occur in-phase at the Fröhlich condensate’s lowest frequency.
They tell us all this in order to tell us this: It turns out that the Fröhlich Condensate is not a candidate for this theory because after forty years of trying really hard, no one has managed to make or find one. They require high temperatures in order to exist. I was afraid to find out how high. (Bose-Einstein requires absolute zero.)
I have been aware of the Bose-Einstein condensate for years because it has become a staple of sorts in science fiction novels. I may have mentioned it a few times in some of my own in fact. It is a fifth state of matter—solid, liquid, gas, plasma, and condensate. Never heard of the Fröhlich condensate until today, which is very exciting except for it not currently existing. What is fascinating here is the attempt to explain consciousness in terms of quantum computing components. Sadly, yet another theory has failed. I’m sure it comes as no surprise that I have an alternative one ready and waiting.
Let us suppose, for the sake of our discussion, that there is a substance, or material in the universe which contains, as an inherent aspect or characteristic, consciousness, or intelligence. We will call this material “spirit”. On some level currently unknown, but sans “cellular quantum computing elements” , this material entity connects with the corporeal human body. While this “spirit” material is physical—actual substance—it is of a nature so refined that it cannot as yet be detected with current technology. It is this form, complete and independent its own right, that contains consciousness and imbues the brain and body with its intelligence as well as its animation. The “spirit” material exists prior to, and independent of, the corporeal body and enters or connects with the body some time prior to birth, which is why researches are having such a difficult time finding what we call “mind.” The material requires neither extreme heat or cold to exist. If we were to replace our term “spirit” with a more secular-sounding label, such as “ectoplasmic construct” or “entangled-Foam Matrix” or “trans-dimensional condensate”, scientists would gleefully add my theory to the others already accepted—despite no evidence whatsoever—by the scientific community. Many fine grants could be won, experiments could be added to the schedule for the LHC, and another generation of researches living off the governments teat would be able to earn a living in their chosen fields. This would help to stimulate the economy and bring us back to our rightful place at kings of the hill in the world of R&D. Now I ask you; where’s the down-side to this?
IGM The Big Stem-cell Anouncement
Inter-Galactic Memo
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crack political hack (I just liked the way that sounded)
Re: The Big Stem-Cell announcement
Well, the big day has finally arrived; President Obama reversed Bush’s Executive Order which forbade using federal money for fetal stem-cell research. Lots of people cheering, lots of people booing. Most people have no clue either way, having long ago glued ear-buds into their heads and followed the Guru Leary’s advice, albeit in a different idiom than Tim envisioned.
So according to the latest Executive Order, federal money can now be used for fetal stem cell research. All is well in the universe again.
We might want to clarify a few things however. According to countless headlines, some people seem to think there was a ban on stem-cell research, or at least a ban on fetal stem-cell research. You know, because that mean, election-stealing, Bible-thumping George Bush hated sick people, remember?
Actually, there was a ban on using federal money for the research, that was all. There was no ban, ever, on fetal stem-cell research, which has been underway and going strong for years in labs that don’t use federal money. There has been no shortage of either money or research in these labs. Billions have been spent and will continue to be, either donated, or in R&D money from private-sector corporations.
So why the big fanfare about the end of the ban? Obama is making it sound like some kind of dam will be breaking and now new funding will be flooding the halls of research labs everywhere. New miracle cures (his word) are right around the corner now. Michael J Fox will be back on television by summer, and the lady down the street will be out of her wheel chair and turning cartwheels in a few hours.
Can you say dis-in-gen-u-ous? Fetal stem cell research has been going strong for well over a decade now. No earth-shaking news to report. No breakthroughs. Progress is being made. Michael (whom I just love, he’s so talented, don’t you think?) will have to stay retired a tad longer.
So what did President Bush’s ban accomplish? Well, for one thing, it forced scientists to be creative. I’ve been following this for several years now and at least three times a year we’ve had an announcement of a breakthrough in alternative methods of finding, using, or producing viable, un-differentiated stem cells. So we have about a dozen sources besides a fetus.
Well then, what’s the big deal about the reversal of the ban? A couple things actually. One is the aforementioned propaganda blitz, making Obama look like the Great Liberator, freeing science which had been shackled by the mean, nasty Bush. Nonsense. Another is the left’s irrational attachment to abortion as a symbol of equality, solidarity, and women’s rights. A commitment to non-fetal stem-cell research would have been seen by the left as a weakening of the mantra that easy access to an abortion is a fundamental right, which will tolerate no threat to its primacy. Nothing can be allowed to weaken the necessity of abortion. Fetal stem-cell research is of paramount importance to the left. It gives scientific and medical validity to the practice of abortion. Never mind that it is completely unnecessary for the research to continue.
And no one anywhere would ever have the poor taste to question the mighty and hallowed halls of science, right? They have all the answers! They never get it wrong! (Except for that thing about the arrowheads, and the whole ozone scare, and anthropomorphic green-house gassing, and eugenics, and don’t forget major parts of Newtonian physics, and all those announcements about having discovered all there is to discover, oh, and the impossibility of flight and . . . well you get the point) Why, who in their right mind would ever suggest that fetal stem-cell research might someday ‘progress’ to fetus-farming? Not me! I certainly can’t envision women getting pregnant again and again in order to let doctors abort their fetus and purchase it for the labs, can you? Actually, we already have a name for that. It comes from that classic sci-fi novel, Dune, where clones are custom-engineered and grown by the Bene Tleilax in Axlotl Tanks, which are assumed for three books to be high-tech apparatus of some kind, but turn out to be human females in permanent coma’s, their bodies attached to nutrient lines and monitoring devices. Don’t think it can happen? Watch.
Once again, the politicians in power are doing the old Texas Side-Step. Remember Roosevelt promising us up one side and down the other that the new social security number would never be used for anything other than social security issues? Absolutely never for identification purposes? Or how Nixon promised he would never escalate the Viet Nam war? Or bomb North Viet Nam? Or Cambodia? Or Jimmy Carter promising he had a set? And now they’re promising us that abortions will never be turned into an industry. No, no, no! the fetus will never become a commodity. Shall we start a betting-pool in honor of President Obama? I’m putting ten bucks on 2015 as the year abortion companies, whose purposes will be the wholesale harvesting of otherwise viable fetuses, are traded on Wall Street.
To: All Personnel
Fr: W. Leavitt, Crack political hack (I just liked the way that sounded)
Re: The Big Stem-Cell announcement
Well, the big day has finally arrived; President Obama reversed Bush’s Executive Order which forbade using federal money for fetal stem-cell research. Lots of people cheering, lots of people booing. Most people have no clue either way, having long ago glued ear-buds into their heads and followed the Guru Leary’s advice, albeit in a different idiom than Tim envisioned.
So according to the latest Executive Order, federal money can now be used for fetal stem cell research. All is well in the universe again.
We might want to clarify a few things however. According to countless headlines, some people seem to think there was a ban on stem-cell research, or at least a ban on fetal stem-cell research. You know, because that mean, election-stealing, Bible-thumping George Bush hated sick people, remember?
Actually, there was a ban on using federal money for the research, that was all. There was no ban, ever, on fetal stem-cell research, which has been underway and going strong for years in labs that don’t use federal money. There has been no shortage of either money or research in these labs. Billions have been spent and will continue to be, either donated, or in R&D money from private-sector corporations.
So why the big fanfare about the end of the ban? Obama is making it sound like some kind of dam will be breaking and now new funding will be flooding the halls of research labs everywhere. New miracle cures (his word) are right around the corner now. Michael J Fox will be back on television by summer, and the lady down the street will be out of her wheel chair and turning cartwheels in a few hours.
Can you say dis-in-gen-u-ous? Fetal stem cell research has been going strong for well over a decade now. No earth-shaking news to report. No breakthroughs. Progress is being made. Michael (whom I just love, he’s so talented, don’t you think?) will have to stay retired a tad longer.
So what did President Bush’s ban accomplish? Well, for one thing, it forced scientists to be creative. I’ve been following this for several years now and at least three times a year we’ve had an announcement of a breakthrough in alternative methods of finding, using, or producing viable, un-differentiated stem cells. So we have about a dozen sources besides a fetus.
Well then, what’s the big deal about the reversal of the ban? A couple things actually. One is the aforementioned propaganda blitz, making Obama look like the Great Liberator, freeing science which had been shackled by the mean, nasty Bush. Nonsense. Another is the left’s irrational attachment to abortion as a symbol of equality, solidarity, and women’s rights. A commitment to non-fetal stem-cell research would have been seen by the left as a weakening of the mantra that easy access to an abortion is a fundamental right, which will tolerate no threat to its primacy. Nothing can be allowed to weaken the necessity of abortion. Fetal stem-cell research is of paramount importance to the left. It gives scientific and medical validity to the practice of abortion. Never mind that it is completely unnecessary for the research to continue.
And no one anywhere would ever have the poor taste to question the mighty and hallowed halls of science, right? They have all the answers! They never get it wrong! (Except for that thing about the arrowheads, and the whole ozone scare, and anthropomorphic green-house gassing, and eugenics, and don’t forget major parts of Newtonian physics, and all those announcements about having discovered all there is to discover, oh, and the impossibility of flight and . . . well you get the point) Why, who in their right mind would ever suggest that fetal stem-cell research might someday ‘progress’ to fetus-farming? Not me! I certainly can’t envision women getting pregnant again and again in order to let doctors abort their fetus and purchase it for the labs, can you? Actually, we already have a name for that. It comes from that classic sci-fi novel, Dune, where clones are custom-engineered and grown by the Bene Tleilax in Axlotl Tanks, which are assumed for three books to be high-tech apparatus of some kind, but turn out to be human females in permanent coma’s, their bodies attached to nutrient lines and monitoring devices. Don’t think it can happen? Watch.
Once again, the politicians in power are doing the old Texas Side-Step. Remember Roosevelt promising us up one side and down the other that the new social security number would never be used for anything other than social security issues? Absolutely never for identification purposes? Or how Nixon promised he would never escalate the Viet Nam war? Or bomb North Viet Nam? Or Cambodia? Or Jimmy Carter promising he had a set? And now they’re promising us that abortions will never be turned into an industry. No, no, no! the fetus will never become a commodity. Shall we start a betting-pool in honor of President Obama? I’m putting ten bucks on 2015 as the year abortion companies, whose purposes will be the wholesale harvesting of otherwise viable fetuses, are traded on Wall Street.
IGM Snubbing England
Inter-galactic Memo
To: American citizens
Fr: W. Leavitt, American Citizen
Re: Snubbing England
In the Middle of the nineteenth century England sent one of its premier warships, the HMS Resolute, on and exploratory mission into the Arctic. If you are unfamiliar with the story you should read it or watch one of several documentaries. It’s an extraordinary story of heroism, privation and human endurance. The Captain of the Resolute eventually made it back to England and was court-martialed for leaving a perfectly good ship stuck in the ice. Sometime later the ice gave way enough that the US Navy was able to free the Resolute and tow it back to England as a gift, a symbol of reconciliation for the less-than-cordial relations over the last several decades. Queen Elizabeth determined to have the timber salvaged from the Resolute and had two desks made from some of the wood. One is in Buckingham Palace, the other was a gift to the President of the United States. It has been resting in the Oval Office for years. Those of us who remember the photo of John Kennedy Jr, peeking into a hidden compartment of his father’s desk might recall this story. That was the desk from the Resolute. The symbolism of loyalty and fidelity between two great allies is not only obvious, but important in perpetuity.
Goodness, why am I telling this story? Because of England’s recent visit to America, specifically Gordon (the Prime Minister) Brown’s visit to the White House. Not only was the Obama White House not prepared for such a visit, they did not know how to be prepared. They apparently have no idea what a state visit means, or the definition of what a traditional and important ally might be. This is England, mind you, not Sri Lanka or Lichtenstein. These are the people with whom we secured the victory in WWII, and who have stood by us ever since. One would expect a proper welcome at the very least, but Obama couldn’t put one together with the resources and expertise of his fledgling administration. No press conference, no state dinner, no official welcome. Mostly it was the local equivalent of “hey, how’ ya doin’? What’d ya say your name was?”
Brown came bearing gifts. He gave the President a set of pens made from the wood of the Resolute, symbolizing our continuing relationship and the importance Great Britain puts on it. Diplomatic gifts are a fine art at these rarified levels. They are heavy with symbolism, and convey much that is unspoken between peoples.
The President gave Brown a basket—that’s basket—of DVD’s of American movies. I’m sure it was a thoughtfully chosen collection which typifies the best of our movie industry. Never mind that England has its own robust industry of equal quality, creativity and professional traditions.
Mrs. Brown brought a collection of custom designed and made cloths for the Obama girls from some of England’s premier designers.
Mrs. Obama gave the Brown’s a couple models of Marine One, the Presidential Helicopter. I’m sure they have a crate of them in the basement somewhere.
Let’s recap, shall we? A set of pens from the Resolute, with the attendant symbolism one would expect at this level, and designer clothes, verses a bunch of DVDs (which are the wrong format for England—the Brown’s will not be able to watch them without substantial effort) and a couple Helicopter Models.
Alright—I’m sitting down. Feel free to get back to me and explain how all this is equitable and justified behavior for our Head of State.
Then, to add insult to injury Obama struck again. England presented President Bush with a bust of Winston Churchill shortly after 9-11. Again, this gift was one of two in the world, and carried significant symbolism carrying England’s commitment to stand with us in dire times. Barak told Brown he could take it back, we didn’t want it anymore. He actually stuck it in a box and insisted that Brown take it back with him, even after the Prime Minister carefully explained the significance of the gift and tried desperately to convince the President to keep it, or put it in a museum. This does not bode well for our relationship with Great Britain. Remember Obama assuring us that part of the change he was bringing with him was a new era of relations with our allies and the countries of the world? Strike One Mister President.
Does anyone wonder how England is reacting to all this? I did. Let’s take a look. H-m-m-m-m . . . oh my! Can you say that in print? Here’s a headline from the Telegraph today:
Barack Obama 'too tired' to give proper welcome to Gordon Brown
So what did the President do to salve over the mishandling of the visit.? Again, we go to the source:
Mr Obama rang Mr Brown as he flew home, in what many suspected was an attempt to make amends.
Are you serious? He called him after he left like a thirteen-year old kid? But it just gets better and better. Let’s see what a high-ranking Administration official had to say when questioned about the slight.
The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.
The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: "There's nothing special about Britain. You're just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn't expect special treatment." The apparent lack of attention to detail by the Obama administration is indicative of what many believe to be Mr Obama's determination to do too much too quickly.
I hope everyone is reading this correctly. These excerpts are written with massive doses of that polite restraint and understatement for which the English are famous. They are pissed. And rightfully so. Putin will get a better reception than this. So would Chavez I expect, if the President could figure out how to invite the guy over without inciting riots all over his new playground. And that’s what it is folks, a playground for an unskilled, overwhelmed, panicked kid. This administration is proving every day that it has no idea what the presidency is about, or how to run an official greeting, much less a country. Obama is “overwhelmed” after a month in office. And that’s according to his own staff.
The American source said: "Obama is overwhelmed. There is a zero sum tension between his ability to attend to the economic issues and his ability to be a proactive sculptor of the national security agenda.
"That was the gamble these guys made at the front end of this presidency and I think they're finding it a hard thing to do everything."
Say what you will about Bush (and I have), but it is unlikely that Obama will face anything like 9-11 on his watch, and everything that came with it from that day forward. I’d love to borrow Mr. Peabody’s Way-Back machine and insert President Obama into that classroom in Florida and watch him react when the Secret Service tells him that we are under attack and thousands of innocent citizens are dead. I no longer hold out any hope that this man has the mettle to take the reins and guide this country. And it only took a month. Granted, he does have a nasty recession to deal with, and the whole melt-down thing, as a gift from the previous administration. Isn’t he doing well with the solution? Printing two trillion dollars of fiat currency? Isn’t it interesting that while 60% of those polled are still giving the President good ratings (a slight drop), only 41% think his policies are going in the right direction to bring the country back to an even keel? What do you make of that?
Naturally I will continue to pray for him and his family, and that the current administration will be up to the challenge, despite the obvious fact that they were not, and are not, prepared. And I will support every policy that makes sound sense to me—as soon as I hear about one.
To: American citizens
Fr: W. Leavitt, American Citizen
Re: Snubbing England
In the Middle of the nineteenth century England sent one of its premier warships, the HMS Resolute, on and exploratory mission into the Arctic. If you are unfamiliar with the story you should read it or watch one of several documentaries. It’s an extraordinary story of heroism, privation and human endurance. The Captain of the Resolute eventually made it back to England and was court-martialed for leaving a perfectly good ship stuck in the ice. Sometime later the ice gave way enough that the US Navy was able to free the Resolute and tow it back to England as a gift, a symbol of reconciliation for the less-than-cordial relations over the last several decades. Queen Elizabeth determined to have the timber salvaged from the Resolute and had two desks made from some of the wood. One is in Buckingham Palace, the other was a gift to the President of the United States. It has been resting in the Oval Office for years. Those of us who remember the photo of John Kennedy Jr, peeking into a hidden compartment of his father’s desk might recall this story. That was the desk from the Resolute. The symbolism of loyalty and fidelity between two great allies is not only obvious, but important in perpetuity.
Goodness, why am I telling this story? Because of England’s recent visit to America, specifically Gordon (the Prime Minister) Brown’s visit to the White House. Not only was the Obama White House not prepared for such a visit, they did not know how to be prepared. They apparently have no idea what a state visit means, or the definition of what a traditional and important ally might be. This is England, mind you, not Sri Lanka or Lichtenstein. These are the people with whom we secured the victory in WWII, and who have stood by us ever since. One would expect a proper welcome at the very least, but Obama couldn’t put one together with the resources and expertise of his fledgling administration. No press conference, no state dinner, no official welcome. Mostly it was the local equivalent of “hey, how’ ya doin’? What’d ya say your name was?”
Brown came bearing gifts. He gave the President a set of pens made from the wood of the Resolute, symbolizing our continuing relationship and the importance Great Britain puts on it. Diplomatic gifts are a fine art at these rarified levels. They are heavy with symbolism, and convey much that is unspoken between peoples.
The President gave Brown a basket—that’s basket—of DVD’s of American movies. I’m sure it was a thoughtfully chosen collection which typifies the best of our movie industry. Never mind that England has its own robust industry of equal quality, creativity and professional traditions.
Mrs. Brown brought a collection of custom designed and made cloths for the Obama girls from some of England’s premier designers.
Mrs. Obama gave the Brown’s a couple models of Marine One, the Presidential Helicopter. I’m sure they have a crate of them in the basement somewhere.
Let’s recap, shall we? A set of pens from the Resolute, with the attendant symbolism one would expect at this level, and designer clothes, verses a bunch of DVDs (which are the wrong format for England—the Brown’s will not be able to watch them without substantial effort) and a couple Helicopter Models.
Alright—I’m sitting down. Feel free to get back to me and explain how all this is equitable and justified behavior for our Head of State.
Then, to add insult to injury Obama struck again. England presented President Bush with a bust of Winston Churchill shortly after 9-11. Again, this gift was one of two in the world, and carried significant symbolism carrying England’s commitment to stand with us in dire times. Barak told Brown he could take it back, we didn’t want it anymore. He actually stuck it in a box and insisted that Brown take it back with him, even after the Prime Minister carefully explained the significance of the gift and tried desperately to convince the President to keep it, or put it in a museum. This does not bode well for our relationship with Great Britain. Remember Obama assuring us that part of the change he was bringing with him was a new era of relations with our allies and the countries of the world? Strike One Mister President.
Does anyone wonder how England is reacting to all this? I did. Let’s take a look. H-m-m-m-m . . . oh my! Can you say that in print? Here’s a headline from the Telegraph today:
Barack Obama 'too tired' to give proper welcome to Gordon Brown
So what did the President do to salve over the mishandling of the visit.? Again, we go to the source:
Mr Obama rang Mr Brown as he flew home, in what many suspected was an attempt to make amends.
Are you serious? He called him after he left like a thirteen-year old kid? But it just gets better and better. Let’s see what a high-ranking Administration official had to say when questioned about the slight.
The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.
The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: "There's nothing special about Britain. You're just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn't expect special treatment." The apparent lack of attention to detail by the Obama administration is indicative of what many believe to be Mr Obama's determination to do too much too quickly.
I hope everyone is reading this correctly. These excerpts are written with massive doses of that polite restraint and understatement for which the English are famous. They are pissed. And rightfully so. Putin will get a better reception than this. So would Chavez I expect, if the President could figure out how to invite the guy over without inciting riots all over his new playground. And that’s what it is folks, a playground for an unskilled, overwhelmed, panicked kid. This administration is proving every day that it has no idea what the presidency is about, or how to run an official greeting, much less a country. Obama is “overwhelmed” after a month in office. And that’s according to his own staff.
The American source said: "Obama is overwhelmed. There is a zero sum tension between his ability to attend to the economic issues and his ability to be a proactive sculptor of the national security agenda.
"That was the gamble these guys made at the front end of this presidency and I think they're finding it a hard thing to do everything."
Say what you will about Bush (and I have), but it is unlikely that Obama will face anything like 9-11 on his watch, and everything that came with it from that day forward. I’d love to borrow Mr. Peabody’s Way-Back machine and insert President Obama into that classroom in Florida and watch him react when the Secret Service tells him that we are under attack and thousands of innocent citizens are dead. I no longer hold out any hope that this man has the mettle to take the reins and guide this country. And it only took a month. Granted, he does have a nasty recession to deal with, and the whole melt-down thing, as a gift from the previous administration. Isn’t he doing well with the solution? Printing two trillion dollars of fiat currency? Isn’t it interesting that while 60% of those polled are still giving the President good ratings (a slight drop), only 41% think his policies are going in the right direction to bring the country back to an even keel? What do you make of that?
Naturally I will continue to pray for him and his family, and that the current administration will be up to the challenge, despite the obvious fact that they were not, and are not, prepared. And I will support every policy that makes sound sense to me—as soon as I hear about one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)