January 20, 2018

Open Thread – 20th Day, 1st Month, 2018

Have I Mentioned Before? WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.

Share

To Ask If Fighting Climate Change is “Worth It” Admits Climate Change Exists

I just finished reading the Shake, Rattle, and Troll newsletter. One item in the newsletter was an Op-Ed titled, “Is Fighting Climate Change Worth Sacrificing Modern Civilization.” To be forthcoming, I consider Don McDowell and John Kolezar of Shake, Rattle, and Troll (not the authors) to be my friends and I have been a guest on their Sunday morning radio broadcast in Arizona once or twice. Having said all this, by this place in time Don and John have probably already figured out that am not an echo-chamber of the fake dichotomy of political bias. I am my own man, but there’s another name for what that some might prefer to call me. Let me explain briefly.

Just this past Fall I was asked a question by someone that I have known for many years. This was his question: “Were you born an asshole or did you grow into it?” Once I figured out the question was more serious than in jest, I couldn’t really come up with a quick reply. I didn’t know! The best I can do now is to say it has been a little of both.

Perhaps I am burying my head in the sand a bit…or not…but I choose to think that most people who think me an asshole do so because they disagree with what I say and do. Because most people disagree with what I say and do, I’m readily known as an asshole. I accept that.

I will have to digress from this topic and reenter the realm of Climate Change before you click away!

The author of the Op-Ed wants to know if “fighting climate change” is worth destroying or sacrificing “modern civilization.” With this comment, I have no fewer than three questions.

Question 1: In this article, outside of titles, the term “climate change” is used 7 times and all seven times it is in lower case letters. For those who may not know there is a difference between “Climate Change” and “climate change.” I am not alone when I say that Climate Change refers to the Al Gore variety of make-believe – a political creation for many sinister reasons, the main ones being profit, people control, and genocide.

When used in the context of natural climate change, I would stick with lower case. If, as a reader, you don’t know in what context the author is using this term, it makes it impossible to understand or to have a rational discussion. Distinct lines immediately become crossed and confusion takes over.

I will, for the sake of discussion, assume that the author, when he writes “climate change” and not “Climate Change” he is referring to the natural form of climate change.

Question 2: What does the author mean by “fighting?” The piece certainly lets us know those things Environmentalism is forcing civilization to do to “save the planet,” but how do you “fight” that? I guess you just write Op-Eds and express your dislike? If you don’t understand what is really going on, what’s to fight? God?

Question 3: What is “modern civilization?” Isn’t this too broad a term when discussing a more specific subject like “climate change,” or “Climate Change?” From my perspective, a whole bunch of this “modern civilization” I would like to see destroyed.

My real attempt here is not to try to ridicule the author. It’s to get readers to think beyond overused expressions and platitudes about the environmental, Environmentalism, climate change, and Climate Change.

The author writes of how environmentalists make statements about the climate and the environment in general and present their theories and rationale from the position that man is screwing everything up. Never, ever discussed in any of this is the most important part of all – that our Creator, who made all of this, is far greater than any of us, which includes Climate Change. Yahweh did create it all and that includes you and me as distinct, alpha dogs of the environment. In that plan is perfection. His perfection may not resemble our plans and that’s one of the biggest reasons nobody wants to discuss it. Sorry!

I’m not going to try to guess whether or not Yahweh’s Great Plan includes any kind of Climate Change. I am sure He has and will continue to instruct his angels on what to do about our climate that is always changing and that we have no control over and therefore cannot “fight.”

Also never brought up in discussions about climate change or even Climate Change, is the deliberate man-caused changes in our atmosphere, resulting in weather phenomenon, toxic poisoning of the populace, earthquakes, fires, etc. Ignorant people never look up and if you point it out to them they are not at all interested even though it is killing them. It’s easier to deny. This topic is unending and so I’ll leave it alone.

So, when someone asks if fighting climate change is worth anything, I have to say no. No, because climate change is Yahweh’s call and I can’t tell Him what to do, and, no, because Climate Change is a sinister, political plot that the people are being used to their deaths for. Join it if you wish and you will because you fail to recognize what’s really going on.

One thing is for certain. When someone asks if fighting climate change or Climate Change is worth it, is to admit and recognize that it actually does exist. I’m here to tell you that climate change is natural, that Climate Change is an evil hoax designed for profit and control and that technology, not the kind you think, is behind Climate Change.

Take the easy road and…

DON’T GO LOOK!

 

 

Share

Open Thread – 19th Day, 1st Month, 2018

ALAS! I Guess We’re All Gonna Die

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.

Share

RMEF Conserves Wisconsin Elk Habitat

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation permanently protected key elk habitat in Wisconsin elk country by first acquiring and then conveying a 360-acre inholding to Jackson County Forest.

“This is a crucial transaction because it prevents the potential of development and fragmentation within an area that is vital to Wisconsin’s newest elk herd,” said Blake Henning, RMEF chief conservation officer. “It also both improves and increases public access for hunting, fishing and other outdoor activities.”

The Morrison Creek property is surrounded on three sides by the 122,000-acre Jackson County Forest and is located less than three miles east from where more than 70 elk were released in 2015-2016. The area also provides year-round habitat for black bear, whitetail deer, wild turkey and an array of other wildlife species.

The acquisition opens the door for improved wildlife management practices as well as habitat stewardship work designed to promote early seral habitat for elk and other wildlife.

RMEF previously supplied funding for a nearby grassland enhancement project to increase meadow habitat.

Snipe Lake II Project
RMEF also purchased an 80-acre private inholding within the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest. The transaction, which builds on a prior acquisition in Wisconsin’s northern elk restoration area, permanently protects key elk habitat and is critical to future forest management efforts.

Since 1990, RMEF and its partners completed 455 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects in Wisconsin with a combined value of more than $8.5 million. These projects protected or enhanced 5,848 acres of habitat and opened or secured public access to 1,630 acres.

Share

Selective Blindness, Changing Perceptions and the Growing Cultural Divide

Today I laughed. I actually laughed or at least grinned several times. Why? Mostly because I do not willingly exist in what most would consider this “normal” world – normal being whatever each individual and group of individuals has determined to be correct and thus normal. Because of my sometimes “out-of-planet” experiences, witnessing the normal, but to me, abnormal, events of the day must cause laughter. Without it, I’m not sure the results.

Most entertaining is when intellectuals(?) wander down roads of philosophical bliss, pointing out the obvious, created by the obvious, for the obvious, but pause in confusion, not understanding such creations, or better yet, intimating that the answer must lie in some unexplored human psyche beyond mortal comprehension. Yikes!

At the root of this laughter, sometimes contrasted with anger and disgust, was a long, sometimes rambling essay of what, in part, was the transformation of human attitudes and perspectives about life in general and living with predators more specifically. The author writes:

We have become tame in Europe, and that is a good thing. Europeans are on the whole no longer wild or savage, as we certainly were a thousand, five hundred, or for that matter sixty-seven years ago. The potential for savagery and bloodthirstiness remains within us, as shown with such dreadful clarity during the war in the former Yugoslavia in 1991?1999. But we are for the most part tame and prefer that state-sanctioned bloodletting on a large scale happen outside the borders of the European Union. And that is, all things considered, a good thing. No one in their right mind would want to go back to the fear and insecurity of anticipated attacks by Vikings, bigoted religious fanatics, or the soldiers of the Axis Powers. The same can be said about our relationship to animals. Most aspects of the living conditions of pets and farm animals are regulated by law in the EU. For wild animals, there are special habitat directives.

My initial reaction to reading this was to ask, what world does this person live in? But then, I realized it wasn’t what world he lived in but my own existence shuns the false world he displays. While what he writes certainly may reflect his perceptions of things, I believe it only substantiates the success of the work of those who control this world and all that is in it. There must be considered the absurdity or insanity that, “state-sanctioned bloodletting” is acceptable beyond the bounds of the newly perceived “tameness.” Talk about living a life of blinded ignorance. To accept the premise of, “No one in their right mind would want to go back to the fear and insecurity of anticipated attacks by Vikings, bigoted religious fanatics, or the soldiers of the Axis Powers,” is to accept a lie and live it. More people would live in fear if they realized that all of this still exists today but is well-hidden. Media control and manipulation, outright lies and deceit, propaganda and control prohibits us from seeing the terrible things that are going on all around us.

The author admits, and accurately so, that this same attitude of blissful blindness and the denial of existing savagery, carries over into how people want to distinguish themselves and their coexistence with animals, both wild and domestic.

To this the writer states:

But something has been lost in the advance of civilization. In pace with the introduction of the refrigerator, hot running water, bathrooms with subfloor heating, and cable TV, our relationship to things wild has changed, especially our attitudes towards the predators among us. The bear, the wolf, the wolverine, the lynx: all have been transformed in our minds into symbolic, anthropomorphized abstractions. It is human nature to do so, and in a way, one could argue that this has been the case for much longer than since the end of World War II. Nevertheless, the already simplified traits have become more starkly black and white in modern, highly urbanized societies.

From the perspective of one suffering from “out-of-planet” syndrome, a serious argument could and should be made about whether or not civilization has advanced or regressed. There is no arguing the claim that “attitudes toward predators,” has changed, certainly, that man has established most animals as “symbolic, anthropomorphized abstractions” to a point where animals are given equal or superior rights to man and are always discussed with terms using human identification.

We know that out of World Wars I and II, the rapid growth of understanding the human mind and how to control and manipulate it, was exploited, for all the wrong reasons. How did it become possible that our minds see things in a completely different way than how our parents taught us and their parents taught them?

But is this really human nature to see animals from this perverse perspective? I don’t think so. It is learned or probably, in this case, planned programming of our minds in order that changes forced onto people for sinister reasons by perverts with more to gain and without one care for the welfare of any animal…or even you for that matter.

The author touches on one of the reasons for the changes in attitude when he writes:

Out in the country, that argument does not hold full sway, at least not in the areas where the predators are actually found. Country people’s empirical knowledge runs deeper and is often — though not always — more complex and objective than city people’s. The problem with European attitudes towards “our” predators, however, is that most Europeans live in cities and not in the countryside.

And the plan, as it appears to me, is to work toward changing the dynamics of human population densities so that urban dwellers surpass in numbers those of the rural world. For certainly their exists differing attitudes and perspectives between the two cultures. It would make perfect sense that if someone or group of someones was interested in control they would work using whatever means possible to grow the numbers of whichever side was ideologically prepared to sacrifice themselves for the cause. This may sound a bit extreme, but is it in reality? When you consider the words, the attitudes, the hate and the anger being perpetuated throughout, often targeted or presented as urban against suburban, somebody must have an important task to undertake.

We are but duped pawns!

Share

An Example of How Scientism Has Invaded Our Lives

According to Wikipedia, Scientism is: “a term generally used to describe the facile application of science in unwarranted situations not covered by the scientific method.” Okay, so to understand what that means, we find that “facile” means: “1. appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial. 2. easily achieved; effortless.” A Scientismist is one who practices Scientism, regardless of their cognition of their chosen path of Scientism. Forgive the Father for they know not what they do?

Scientism can be explained further to state that when the real scientific process becomes too complex, or in reality no longer fits a narrative, the human condition or human values are applied instead. It’s what most want to believe. If it feels good, do it. When we examine the “Scientific Method,” once again Wikipedia says, “The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry is commonly based on empirical or measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.”

If this sounds complex, involving hard work, it is. And thus, Scientism abandons all of this and replaces it with something easier.

In short, the practice of Scientism promotes fantasy and mythology because it is easier to believe in lies than it is to learn the truth.

An example of this might be the tale of Little Red Riding Hood. Instead of researching the history of life with wolves throughout the world dating back as far as the 11th Century, to understand why people feared man-eating wolves, it is easier to say that people became scared of wolves because somebody made up a story about wolves rather than the idea for such a story had its roots in actual events leading up to that time.

Jim Beers, a retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist, calls the exemplification of Scientism as Romance Biology and/or Voodoo Science.

All of the characteristics of Scientism, Romance Biology, and Voodoo Science have invaded our institutes of “higher” learning, growing exponentially like some foreign toxic fungus. The result of this phenomenon can be witnessed with the turn of each page of any news report or “scientific” journal. This epidemic now threatens nearly every aspect of man’s life.

Recently, it was reported that wolves had attacked and killed beef livestock in Oregon. An Oregon wildlife biologist and someone described as the “Oregon wolf coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,” said that wolves had visited a ranch for years where the depredations took place and there hadn’t been any problems, apparently addressing the situation as though the wolf pack was a 4-H club.

This same biologist was further quoted as saying, “We can’t just trust anymore that (wolves) are going to come visit and not cause problems. Things have changed in that regard.”

Maybe the biologist could intervene on behalf of the wolves and suggest a “Time Out,” to give wolves the opportunity to reflect on their actions. The absurdity of the statement should stand alone and speak volumes of the errancy of today’s society, but it doesn’t. Someone must try to point out the error of their ways…for whatever that might be worth.

What we see is the exemplification of Scientism and the useless crap that is being used for brainwashing purposes at all levels of wildlife biology and wildlife management, and thus a filtering down throughout all society. Whom do we excuse as evidently this biologist’s bubble has been burst due to his perception that Romance Biology’s version of wolf behavior didn’t happen the way the books taught him it would. He believes that because wolves attacked livestock, “Things have changed in that regard.” Are you serious?

Historic document after historic document reveals that wolves systematically attack and kill livestock – sometimes for food and sometimes for bloodlust. I recall that during the many meetings and comments gathered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to the introduction of wolves into the Rocky Mountains, all efforts to convince the Feds, even with historic documentation, that wolves don’t play fairly was totally disregarded. I said then that one day people would have to learn the hard way. And here we are. Yet, we see one biologist, a good representation of all wildlife biologists, who is of the belief that wolves attacking livestock is a “changed” behavior in wolves. No wonder nobody is willing to consider that wolves also attack and eat people.

Scientism disregards the complications of gaining knowledge through truth. It is easier to accept the false belief that wolves don’t attack people or livestock. When events reveal real wolf behavior, somehow this is perceived as a new event, a change in behavior that somehow must be dealt with. To them, it is not the wolves’ fault. Lacking, by choice, any knowledge of what it is and has been like for centuries to “learn to live with wolves,” ignorant and misled people think wolves attacking livestock is a rogue event.

Real wolf scientists, for centuries, have related the dangers associated with aggressive wolf behavior. For those interested in truth, libraries abound with books and documentation of wolf attacks on people and livestock. It is obvious that over the years, man’s knowledge and the processes used in employing that knowledge have changed. These changes have resulted in what I now call Scientism and some call Romance Biology and Voodoo Science.

How anybody chooses to perceive wolf behavior, will not ever alter the historic behavior of wolves. Perceptions have changed but wolf behavior basically remains the same throughout all time.

 

 

Share

Open Thread – 18th Day, 1st Month, 2018

Is Global Warming Going to Kill Us All or Are We Going to Die Filthy Rich?

Please use this open thread to post your ideas, information, and comments about issues not covered in articles published on this website. Thank you.

Share

RMEF Soars to 9th Straight Year of Record Membership

Press Release from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation:

MISSOULA, Mont.—Riding a wave of conservation success, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation enters 2018 with 227,650 members, marking its ninth consecutive year of record membership growth.

“This continual sustained growth is a reflection of our on-the-ground conservation mission and improved advocacy and outreach efforts,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “We are grateful to our members, volunteers, partners and sportsmen and women who are so supportive.”

This new tally marks a 50 percent increase in membership since 2008 and a 2.4 percent increase from a year ago.

Among its 2017 highlights, RMEF erased all long-term debt and remains debt-free for the first time in its 33-plus years. It also launched the Elk Network, a new online digital outreach tool focusing on all things elk and elk hunting. Additionally, RMEF assisted with ongoing elk restoration efforts in Wisconsin and reaffirmed its support of America’s public lands. It also bestowed its highest conservation honor on its 11,000-plus volunteers for their dedicated efforts in boosting RMEF’s mission.

“While we value and appreciate this record growth trend, RMEF vows to do all we can to increase and accelerate our conservation mission of ensuring the future elk, other wildlife, their habitat and our hunting heritage,” added Allen.

Since 1984, RMEF and its partners completed more than 11,000 conservation and hunting heritage outreach projects with a combined value of more than $1.1 billion. These projects protected or enhanced 7.2 million acres of habitat and opened or secured public access to 1.2 million acres.

Share

Maine’s Moose Lottery: It’s About Gaming the System Isn’t It?

Man is inherently dishonest even when they think they are not. Most come down on the side of the ends justify the means and/or there’s nothing wrong with a “white” lie. Also clawing at my brain is the idea that ethics is something you do when nobody is watching. As a result, untold amounts of energy are being expended on an hourly basis to “game” any system that is in place in order to gain a personal advantage.

Maine has an annual moose lottery. It’s not perfect and many (those who seem to never win) think it’s unfair. It’s about to become more complicated and corrupt. Why? Money!

A bill has been introduced that would allow money to exchange hands during a legal moose permit swap. According to the man who is in charge of permitting, around 100 moose permits are swapped each hunting season. The intent of the swapping regulation is to allow two people to exchange their permits for reasons other than a profit. Here’s a real example of one such swap that was beneficial to both parties involved without the need to buy or sell anything.

Two people were drawn as winners in the moose lottery. Both drew a permit in a zone they didn’t live near. It was not their first choice. As it happened, that if they swapped permits each would be closer to home for their hunt. What’s wrong with that? And wasn’t that the intent of the rule, to begin with?

Now it seems that complaints have surfaced because wealthy moose permit winners want to offer someone else with a permit gobs of money for an exchange (are their no limits?). Currently, that kind of remuneration is prohibited. It appears the most complaints came about when someone holding a moose permit for a calf or cow moose, wanted to pay someone who held a permit for a bull to swap. What’s wrong with that?

When applying for a chance for a moose permit, each applicant must choose the zone they prefer to hunt in. I believe the system allows for each applicant to name first and second preferences of what zones. Perhaps a third or more. You don’t get to choose what sex or age moose you will hunt, which makes one wonder who does.

I know of at least one, and I’m sure there are more, applicant who put in for a zone to hunt moose knowing it was the least requested zone increasing their chances of winning. The intent was that if they won, they could find someone to swap permits with. He won his permit but couldn’t find a swap. He didn’t go on the hunt and the permit was wasted. This is part of gaming the system. It still goes on and I would expect it would go on even more if money is allowed to enter the swap.

What might happen if I live near Zone 1, one of those areas few apply for because of its remoteness, and I am approached before the permitting process with a proposal to apply for Zone 1 and if I get drawn and draw a bull permit, I can make $10,000 or more by swapping my permit with someone else who has already arranged for a guide to take them on a Zone 1 hunt. Obviously, there are certain risks being taken here but millions of dollars are wagered each and every day for taking risks.

There are other issues to consider. It was brought up by someone else that allowing for the exchange of money would prompt those not interested in moose hunting to apply for a permit knowing that money could be made by “swapping.” In effect, the Maine Moose Lottery would become an endeavor at catering to the whims of wealthy hunters who could buy every permit issued.

Some may see all of this as not such a big deal. If so, where do we stop? If the demand by the wealthy to get a moose permit is so high, then why not begin with allowing the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) to simply auction off the 2,000 to 3,000 permits allocated each year. Think of the revenue they could generate to go toward their raises and pensions. They could continue to work with the guides and outfitters in order that all can profit…all at the expense of the taxpayer who simply is seeking a chance at hunting a moose.

Consider that with the ability to buy a moose permit, interested parties will go far beyond locals and out-of-staters. International interest will grow as well.

Maybe the Maine Legislature will consider passing and modifying this proposal in order that they can tax it and they too will generate more income for raises and pensions. There is no end.

Money corrupts! It always has and always will. Each time the Maine Legislature allows for more infiltration of money the more corruption will take place. The system will continue to be gamed by those seeking an unlawful advantage for their selfish wants. You cannot avoid this!

Even though the MDIFW Joint Committee has put in language in the proposed bill that would prevent licensed guides from reaping any profits from buying and selling moose permits, or arranging for them, are members of the committee so naive to think this loophole can’t be beaten. Come on man! Under the table deals and straw “purchases” would run rampant. And those are the only ones I’m smart enough to think of.

In the meantime, the so-called honest moose hunter’s chances at a moose hunt are further diminished because the majority of permits are being taken up by nonhunting applicants for profits.

As the saying goes, “Money talks and shit walks.” I’m walking.

Share

Multiculturalism Among Wolves

Share