I have recently come across a few interesting videos.  I am finding interesting videos more frequently now, so I may make video posts more often now.

1.  Persistence Hunting

I will probably do a post on persistence hunting at some point in the future.  This is basically hunting by chasing an animal until you run it to death.  Hold your head high if you can hunt using this technique.  I have heard that Native Americans hunted in this manner.

2.  Mobility of hunter-gatherers

I found this video in a discussion thread on Matt Metzgar’s website.  Watch how the tribesmen in this video sit, start around 1 minute into the video to see the most impressive part.  All of the people sit squatting down and are very comfortable in that position.  It is second nature to them they don’t even think about sitting on their butts.

3.  The Lyre bird

While not related to health, this has to be one of the funniest/most amazing animals I have heard about in a while.

Listen to the podcast.

The BEAUTIFUL Keara Murphy

Tonight’s show hosted by the sensual Andrew and sonsy Annabel.

Keara Murphy – One Burd; Many Voices

Keara is performing her new solo show at The Edinburgh Festival Fringe which enjoyed a sellout at Glasgow International Comedy Festival 2009 and a riotous two-night stand at Leith Festival 2009. For further details see: www.laughinghorsecomedy.co.uk/freefestival/keara.htmt Keara

Keara is also a professional Actor and has appeared in ITV’s Taggart, the BBC1 sketch show, Velvet Soup, and films, The Best Man (Hat Trick Productions) and Joy Division (Dreamtool Entertainment). Stage work has included Gertrude in Shakespere’s Hamlet, Ranyevskaia in Chekov’s, The Cherry Orchard and Anna in Stars In The Morning Sky.

She is a regular contributor on Radio Scotland’s MacAuley and Co as well as The Radio Cafe with Janice Forsythe. She also makes regular appearances on Forth One and Leith FM – woop woop!

Brian Gittins - sexy in real life

Brian Gittins – Roadside Cafe Owner

Brian promised to be a tough character to interview, then proceeded to come on in character as … the grumpy man wot runs the roadside cafe off the A23 in West Sussex.

By day, Brian runs a greasy spoon. “Probably the best roadside café in a 12-mile radius of Pyecombe,” he croaks. “And those aren’t my words.” By night, he’s an aspiring comedian, here to showcase an almost-but-not-quite chaotic compendium of games, drawings, singalongs, and bizarrely bad non-jokes. Every day at the Pleasance Courtyard at 4:45pm till 31st August.

Chris Devotion of Elvis Suicide

Elvis Suicide

Chris Devotion of Elvis Suicide gave us a very witty – for a weegie – and for a muso – interview. Having arrived early, he got to experience the black-out in the station while someone fixed the fuse, thinking his pal, Andrew, had hoaxed him into coming on to live radio. His wise cracks are legion and really should consider a side-line in comedy.
Described as punk / rock / country on their myspace – http://www.myspace.com/theelvissuicide these guys leave u hungry for more … with their 2min30sec tracks. Truly talented artists.

Next appearing at Sneaky Pete’s on 21st Aug at 20:00.

For all of you youngsters reading this, Rich Little was the best mimic of his time. He made a whole carreer out of imitating celebrities. Not many people do that anymore. Of the ones that do, I’d say Kevin Pollack is the best. You may remember him from The Usual Suspects. Or maybe not.

This bird, however, picks more mundane things to mimic. Other birds, chainsaws, drill, hammer, and jigsaw can also be heard here. I wonder if he has an agent yet?

I’m reminded of a time when a guy I worked with had to babysit his sister’s parrot while she did 30 days in jail for hiding her fugitive boyfriend. He brought the parrot and cage  to work every day and sat it on the front counter so all the customers and office people could hear it. It would wolf-whistle at girls, imitate a LOUD baby crying (perfectly), and the strangest one of all: An electric can-opener opening a can, complete with the little snapping sound the top makes when when it’s cut off.

That’s the thing with all of these birds. One minute they’ll sound like a genius, and the next minute they’ll go back to being dumber than a chicken. If chicken had any brains, we probably wouldn’t eat them, we’d put them on Youtube!

As a household of travelers, we have accumulated a fat jar of coins from around the globe. You can’t change them back to US dollars, and you don’t use them when you’re actually there because it’s embarrassing to hold up the line while you try to figure out the reasoning behind the enormous 5 cent coin and the tiny, tiny dollar ones. So, because it’s raining and my true love has parked himself in the studio, preventing me from accomplishing actual work, I am able to answer the really big questions. Such as, “Who has cooler money, Australia or New Zealand?” Now, I’m leaving the bills out of this, it’s an all-coin bout going up to a dollar. I know they have two dollar coins, but that’s wrong and unnatural. It’s all tails up because the heads are all versions of Elizabeth II. Let’s start with the five cent pieces, shall we. Nations, start your mints.

Extinct Coins and Living Fossils...Australia & the Echidna, and NZ & the Tuatara

Top coin is AU, bottom is NZ. Oddly enough, it seems that NZ did away with their 5-cent coin in 2006, shortly after my first trip there. So this is a rare coin now, hah! It features the tuatara, an endangered reptile that has been stuck in his ways since the Mesozoic. Pretty cool, NZ, pretty cool. But look at Australia–awwww, it’s an echidna, and he’s rolled into a ball. And while primitive reptiles are cool, a monotreme that lays eggs, has a four-headed penis and electrolocator abilities…sorry NZ. This one goes to the Aussies.

Lyre Bird Plumes vs. Maori Carving

10 cents: Top coin is Aussie, bottom Kiwi.

This is a tough one. The lyre bird is one of my favorite animals, but the Maori carving is also cool. I’m giving it to NZ on this one, since otherwise it’s just Australia falling back on their endless supply of fascinating wildlife.  It’s 1-1, folks.

But lyre birds are kick ass, observe:

flightless...things...

20 Cents: Top coin AU, bottom NZ.  This one goes to Australia. You can’t really tell from the pic, but the AU coin is a really artsy rendition of a swimming platypus. Spoiler Alert: the kiwi loses out because NZ gives up and uses it again on the dollar coin.

For some reason I didn’t have any NZ 5o cent pieces, so here’s the wikipedia image:

Kangaroo Coat-of-Arms

So, stick with me, folks, I know this is a snooze so let me just quickly point out how bizarre the Australian kangaroo-emu coalition 50 cent piece is. It appears they are running the country all by themselves. That done, I give it to Australia. Sorry, Endeavor.

And on the $1 coin, NZ defaults to the kiwi. Again. I know it’s not (mostly, anymore) their fault that there aren’t more sexy animals on their island. Oh, whoops, and Australia went for the kangaroo again. Come on, why not a wombat coin? I say you both lose on that one. I’m not even putting those pictures up.

So you're saying I don't get my own coin? Stupid kangaroos.

So on the completely arbitrary and frivolous grounds of who has cooler coins up to $1, Australia wins. And I was cheering for you, NZ, because I love your ferns and your freaky little birds. And your manuca honey. But hot damn, the Aussies know how to exploit their natural resources to great numismatic effect. And now I promise I will go so something worthwhile with my time. G’day.

So Jim Jones’ clique is called the Byrd Gang. I think this bird should def be their mascot. I favorited this video on youtube awhile ago and completely forgot about it. But it amazes me every time. Be sure you watch until the end. How gangsta is the Lyre Bird? ridic:

Conversations by the water cooler at work usually tend to revolve around the previous night’s tv line-up or the latest headlines – depending on where you work.  Even at my office, those are formidable topics at any given moment.  But, one afternoon last week the topic up for discussion was memorable Family Guy one-liners which some how evolved into sound effects used in television shows and movies.  Interestingly enough, we were all on the same page before the first example was even thrown out – we all were about to reference those crazy sound effects that you think you hear in just about every single thing you’ve ever seen.  The one I’d noticed and triggered the next phase of conversation with was that female voice you hear on a police radio as the squad car pulls up to scene X.  Then someone mentioned the Star Wars scream (as he referenced) it, so out of curiosity, we turned to Google so that we could bring what we were referencing to life (and also just to confirm that we weren’t a. crazy and b. hearing things).

Turns out, that Star Wars scream is actually called the Wilhelm scream and sure enough – we weren’t crazy.  The search revealed that not only was it used multiple times; it was used so often that people have enough material to compile two and a half to four minute long montages!  Films like Sin City, Batman, Lord of the Rings, Team America, Toy Story, Kill Bill and to bring it full circle, even Family Guy has paid tribute to the Wilhelm scream.

So where did the name come from?  To find out, you need to go back to the 1950’s.  The first film, of the now 140 which use the effect, was made in 1951 and was called Distant Drums, which eventually saw a number of soldiers get attacked by an alligator slinking around in the murky everglade waters.  A total of six screams were recorded after the scene to be cut in later, under the recording title “man getting bit by an alligator, and he screams.”  Ultimately, it would be the fifth of the six recorded that would be used in that part, though takes four and six, along with a repeat of five were used earlier in the same movie.

The Wilhelm’s fame came along with Ben Burtt who was the sound designer for the Star Wars films.  Burtt re-discovered the sound effect mislabelled as, “Man being eaten by alligator,” and decided it was perfect for how a Stormtrooper would sound falling off a ledge in Star Wars IV: A New Hope.  For the sake of reference, it was renamed the Wilhelm scream after Private Wilhelm, who was a character in 1953’s The Charge at Feather River.  But that still doesn’t answer who’s voice it is.

Burtt took it a step further to find out and after going through papers at Warner Brothers, was able to determine that it likely belonged to singer/actor Sheb Wooley who had an uncredited role in Distant Drums but was also called back in a small group of actors to record a series of vocal additions during post-production.

Bird's Nest Soup

Later this same day, over some celebratory cake for a colleague, the conversation turned to rare delicacies that were really ‘bizarre’ (not the disgusting delicacies – everyone talks about those).  One of the folks in our office happens to have an Asian background being originally from Hong Kong and a long time ago, enlightened me about Bird’s Nest soup.  So, this is what I decided to offer up to the group during this conversation.  This soup has been made for 400 years and what’s a bit bizarre about it, besides its name?  The fact that it’s actually made from a bird’s nest!  The swiftlet to be exact.  They’re mostly collected throughout Thailand from White-nest and Black-nest swiftlets who live in caves and can generate a nest in 35 days.  The highest destination markets for these nests are Hong Kong and the United States where a kilogram of the white nest would go for about $2,000.00 USD and the red-blood nest would be about $10,000.00 USD.  Per serving, that translates to $30.00 – $100.00 a bowl!

Swiftlet Nesting House, Thailand

The industry has become so huge that concrete nesting houses have been built to give more venues for the birds to make the valuable nests in.  While it’s appearance looks somewhat like a prison, investigating the species of bird revealed that they’re not the least bit endangered.  The soup is said to have health benefits as well that include aiding digestion, raising libido, improving voice, alleviating asthma, and improving overall focus and immune support.

From screams to soup, there’s a lot more that you can talk about with your coworkers now around the water cooler besides the most recent episode of your favourite primetime show.

But, if these two items aren’t good enough conversation starters, you could combine them.  How does that make sense?  Check out this bird that has the vocal range to mimic everything around it.  It’s called the Lyre Bird, and this clip was around the office following the swiftlet / bird’s nest soup discussion as another ‘interesting bird’.  The debate is still continuing at work as to whether or not the chainsaw stretches the truth too far beyond belief, but I think this bird’s legit and awesome either way!

Shopping period is like christmastime. Exciting and surprising, but in a mature sort of way. Not like bouncing-off-the-walls or anything. Gentle surprises, gentle excitement. My cell biology professor, Prof Heywood, sounds like:

Not the bird, but the narrator himself, David Attenborough, naturalist extraordinaire. Soft, soothing, gentle. Inflecting with utmost elegance. Filled with idealized British compassion. Like a distant lullaby from pre-1776. Not good at 8:30 in the morning, but nice nonetheless. The lyre bird is pretty cool too. Here’s another for you animal lovers:

Nature is pretty amazing. You see it when you look at that tiger’s face; huge eyes that see the things like we wouldn’t believe. We live in an amazing world, and thanks to people like Attenborough who have dedicated their lives to helping us appreciate it, we can see the amazing world. Natural history two decades ago, and now Planet Earth. Now will we be able to see what the natural world sees? Yes, we can, but the clarity will come in another two decades. And what we see with clarity will not be pretty. From the natural world, we have much to learn about how our own human world functions. Look through the natural world’s eyes, and see the difficulty of what they see.

But anyways I was writing about the gentle surprises of shopping period. Hope the Attleborough-esque voice doesn’t put me to sleep (as a number of science concentrators who have had Heywood before warned me of). In light of my determination to succeed in Cell Bio, let me say this: I won’t let it, no doubt.

Feerick said some good things. Posed some good questions. Is Shakespeare transcendent–that is, do the passions that he writes about approach universal, immutable, truth? Or are our passions mutable, changed over time by our culture? Perhaps the love he writes of differs from what we talk about these days. What’s wrong with that? We still find joy in it, but does that mean we are imagining wrong? Imagining really is just right; it is what we do to bring works to life. But the content is one thing. How we are exposed to the content is another. Reading it in a classroom setting is far from attending a theatre performance, and attending a theatre performance is movements and cultures–worlds–away from engaging in the actor-audience dynamics of the Shakespearean stage of his time. What is the function of theatre? Is the audience merely that, passively absorbing the show separated from them by an invisible wall? Or should there be less of a wall, and the theatre contained by less of a boundary as to jar the audience out of its passivity? Ah, this histrionic theory engages me. Maybe theory in general. Seems I’ve gotten a bit more theoretical. This’ll be a good semester for it.

So maybe studying Shakespeare reveals a past that does not reflect the present. Oh, so bad and useless? Not quite. Perhaps we can use this to restructure our own understanding of our own society that will one day be studied just as we do Shakespeare.

Just heard this: “Softly as in a Morning Sunrise” by Hank Jones, on For My Father. Recent NPR interview here (36 min). (online version difficult to find, so I’ll be buying the cd and post the .mp3 on soon).

Come Thursday, 9am, 7 hrs of sleep & 2 days of basketball & 1 day of weightlifting (& another day of sexyback intensity to come), and I’m sitting in a basement room of Sayles after coming in late to my first theory class–Interpretation, taught by Paul Armstrong. I learned that interpretation can by thought of, among other things, as a hermeneutic circle and a terministic screen. Now I’m not sure if I was genuinely excited or if I was so tired in both body and mind that anything intellectual and academic would incite my excitement. Regardless, I recall, just a day and a half away (but maybe 5 cycles of sleep and awake) away, that I was quite engaged by Prof Armstrong; and that I am now quite unable to remember just what it was he said that captured me so. Most likely the sheer subjectivity that the theory of interpretation explores. As he said, science is objective. Pure science can only be interpreted in one way. But when it comes to literature, the myriad interpretations create subjectivity. So simple, so deep; alas, too early.

I noticed quite a difference between the male and female English professors. But due to the small sample size I cannot make much statistical inference. I don’t think these gender biases are as gigantic as they once were, but I sense that they still remain to some extent, although they are covered up to a great extent by the individual’s character. Kahn was kind of silly. Shaky intro to the course. Eyes darting from her paper to the ceiling and almost collapsing her body with power and emphasis as she paced across the room. Thin, swaying, wispy.

Just heard Jazz Crimes by Joshua Redman, from his album Elastic. HOT STUFF, especially the end right before they come in with the melody again. He’s got a melody going with his tenor sax for sure, but there’s some way which he’s getting a fifth to play along with him, be it a synthesizer or he’s feeding his sound through something.Below is the youtube version. Be sure to check out the recording though. INSANE, MAYNE.

Katz had great command. She was serious, serious intellect and serious communication. Put her hands up to her forehead and moved them up, bringing her tight curly hair back an inch or so, and I saw a little bit of craziness from all the work she must be doing. Intensity, tense, stress. The books will be in late, she said. I should say that I turned in the list late.

The best of all came next. I entered the John Hay and went upstairs to a special room, Lownes something or another, normally reserved for special events, but serving especially for Prof Carl Kaestle (not to be confused with the Carl Kassell of NPR), who came back out of retirement by the request of Brown, to teach this class, the History of Print Culture in America. The room was hardly lit at the entrance, only just by the light illuminating the desks arranged in a square at the other end of its great length. Prof Kaestle invited us over, and started right on time, for he had to catch a flight to San Francisco in an hour. His hour unfolded like a smooth melody. We listened, and he took us from place to places seamlessly. Effortlessly, like one retired and content with each and every word that lightly roll from his mouth in weightless chains linked together by a coherence that spans both the yard and quarter hour, mile and entire hour. Regarding print between the 1880’s to 1940’s, the social effect of explosive large-scale manufacturing can be considered in two contradictory ways: one, as an assimilating force that widely propagated the spread of knowledge, at once standardizing and homogenizing the mass population with the copies upon copies of pamphlets and books and the like; and two, as a diversifying force that, as a cheap, low-cost means of distributing knowledge, widely promoted the spread of print from all corners of the nation to other places where such knowledge was scarcely found in conversation, much less print. The class will look at literacy, Prof Kaestle said. To what extent it is both liberating and constraining. Theory too. Interpretation, like before. A theoretical framework of producers and readers. Interpretation within communities, or entirely subjective and dependent upon the reader. It was just yesterday, but like I mentioned earlier, my impressions and thoughts are already beginning to fade. A little tired, and the past four days are a bit of a blur. And I spend a lot of time writing about it all, as you can probably tell if you’ve gotten this far haha, I am just amusing myself and practicing, practicing, practicing.

Some theorists worry about being constrained by prediction. It goes both ways. Consider Lyra, who as a child learns to read the mysterious Golden Compass, an intricate machine of symbols on spinning dials and hands that point at the symbols.

the Golden Compass

It supposedly tells the truth, rather answers questions you ask it in truth. Lyra asks it a question then reads the symbols to understand the answer. How can a symbol tell so much? And with such detail? I believe she knows a part of the truth before she can use the machine to fully understand it. She knows what she is seeking as she seeks it, and seeks confirmation for what she seeks. Sounds scientific. Philosophical. It’s both and it’s brilliant.

Pell’s Moral and Intellectual Authority

Cardinal Pell occupies a strategic position in the Climate Change debate in Australia. He is sometimes cited (e.g here and here, and Greg Sheridan here) by the ‘Denialist’ side as an intelligent, impartial skeptic, but as a very senior clergyman, he is assumed by many ordinary Australians to be impartial and honest and consequently becomes an authority on Climate to them also.

In discussions with my family, who are not Catholic, Pell’s rejection of the Climate Change thesis convinces them that the Climate Change position is weak. They say ‘Pell knows many scientists who are afraid to speak out against Climate Change’. They consider him to be honest and fair. I would guess that many other pretty normal and not necessarily Catholic middle-class households also consider Pell to be credible on Climate Change.

The Source Of Pell’s Bias On Climate

In my opinion Pell is not impartial on Climate Change. He has a bias toward rejecting the Climate Change hypothesis as a result of his theological positions on Ecology, Population and Faith. This bias is evident in his rhetoric which displays a reactionary slant not compatible with an ‘open’ position on the subject.

For example, in a Sunday Telegraph column in Feb 2007 entited ‘Scaremonger’, he described the Climate Change case as ‘propaganda’ containing (but not limited to) ‘a lot of nonsense’ and ‘mild hysteria’ which is ‘dangerously close to superstition’ pushed by (but not limited to) ’scaremongers’ and ’some zealots’.

To my knowledge Pell never describes the Climate Change Skeptical case in these terms.

Pell’s reading on Climate Change is selective. He quotes various data from Skeptic sources, but does not cross-check the assertions against Proponent sources. As far as I am aware Pell has never retracted an assertion of his later shown to be incorrect. This indicates he is not interested in ‘further evidence’ as he claims.

Pell Gets It Wrong

In ‘Scaremonger’ Pell said:

The East Anglia university climate research unit found that global temperatures did not increase between 1998 – 2005.

Pell is apparently unaware that Client Change Proponents know that there are large natural short-term variations in Global Temperature. The cooler temparatures of 1998-2005 will probably become even cooler due to a La Nina event commencing in 2007. Pell knows that the long-term trend is the important indicator but then uses short-term data to bolster his own case while tarring Climate Change Proponents as harbouring those who use short-term data to magnify their case.

Scaremongers have used temperature fluctuations in limited periods and places to misrepresent longer patterns.

Pell quotes spatial variations in temperature to support the Skeptic case but is unaware that the pattern of spatial variation matches the Climate Change Proponent modelling.

Pell knows that CO2 levels rise during inter-glaciation periods but does not know that this is a different CO2 phenonemon than anthropogenic C02 which causes warming for reasons unrelated to natural global temperature cycles.

Pell notes that NASA has reported that the temperature on Mars has risen by 0.5C, uses this to refute the Proponent claim but is not aware that scientific opinion does NOT ascribe the increase in Martian temperature to an increase in Sunspot or other solar activity, which would be the only way that Mars and Earth could suffer Climate Change from the same source.

In fact, the Sun’s energy output has remained stable since 1978 and the most commonly suggested reason for the Martian temperature increase is a dust-blanket forming in its atmosphere due to prolonged violent winds.

Pell mentioned the Kangerlussuaq glacier in Greenland in an official statement as Archbishop Of Sydney in October 2007, saying that it ‘is not shrinking but growing in size’.

Pell’s source knew but did not say that:

1) Kangerlussuaq has had massive ice-loss from 2000-2006;
2) 2006 showed a seasonal variation with parts of the glacier thickening but with an overall slight loss of ice mass.
3) The pattern of ice-loss is consistent with global warming.
4) The article warns of the possibility of major long-term melting of Greenland’s ice mass.

Pell was deceived by his source, Bjorn Lomborg, who intentionally misrepresented the facts, cherry-picking an article without being faithful to the article’s conclusions, actually reversing them.

I am not aware of Pell denouncing Lomborg as a hysterical, propogandist zealot, as being in the grip of a pagan worship of money or power or peddling nonsense and superstition. These terms Pell reserves for Climate Change Proponents, indicating his lack of objectivity.

Pell’s assertion that Greenland was warmer in the 1940’s than it is today is true, but once again ignores long-term trends. Pell has pulled one period from a century of data and made THAT period normative. Considering the period 1915-1965 as a whole, Greenland is 2 degrees Celcius warmer over the past decade.

On Antarctic temperatures, in ‘Scaremongers’ Pell said that ‘the Antarctic is getting colder and the ice is growing there’ but did not say or did not know that:

1) His reporter considerd only the two decades from 1978 but the primary source discussed a 40 year series showing Antarctica getting slightly warmer on average;
2) Climate models predict a lesser Climate Change effect in the Southern Hemisphere, and less the further South you go.
3) Antarctic wind currents and ocean dynamics mitigate local warming
4) Warming is unambiguous on the Antarctic coast
5) Only in the interior was cooling supposedly present.
6) In Jan-March 2002 the Larsen B sector collapsed and broke up, 3,250 km² of ice 220 m thick disintegrated, meaning an ice shelf covering an area comparable in size to the state of Rhode Island disappeared in a single season.

In short, on Antarctica, Pell was selective to the point of myopia. Really, he doesn’t want to know and if Pell is serious about being open to further evidence he will be interested in this report Antarctica ‘melting faster than first thought’
summarizing an article in Nature magazine regarding latest Australian research in Antarctica.

Pell The Climate Change Lyre Bird

So, taking Pell point by point on Climate, he is wrong every time. Far from assembling a cohesive intellectual case against Climate Change Pell has merely accumulated a melange of factoids disconnected from any integrated understanding of the issue.

What is interesting about Pell is that every time he is interviewed on Climate he throws out different nuggets of Climate data indicating he is constantly gathering denialist material, much as a Lyre Bird might collect any bright and shiny piece of junk it finds in the scrub, just because it thinks its attractive.

The Lyre Bird, like Pell, has no interest in connecting the junk materials together or understanding what they really are or constructing something useful out of them, it just stuffs them into his nest which is the structure it is really interested in attending to.

Pell’s ‘nest’ is Catholic theological positions on Ecology, Population and Faith. These are the larger and more important structures that Pell is really interested in defending. Climate Change is only salient for Pell as it intersects his true areas of concern. Pell is quite happy to misuse Climate Change data in order to bolster his theological perspectives and faith mission.

The fact that Pell has a consistently replenishing source of denialist literature indicates he is reading some denialist websites or magazines. It would be interesting to trace the pattern and timing of Pell’s assertions on Climate to see where he is getting his material from. Any takers ?

Pell On Paganism and Climate

Pell’s real concern about Climate Change is that it is a modern expression of Paganism, a quasi-religious belief based on dialectical fear and worship of the natural world, not whether or not Climate Change is real.

In this article in The Catholic World Report, January 2008, Pell ‘indicated his disappointment’ with the way Australians ‘have embraced even the wilder claims about man-made climate change as if they constituted a new religion.’

some of the more hysterical and extreme claims about global warming appear symptomatic of a pagan emptiness, of a Western fear when confronted with the immense and uncontrollable forces of nature … In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions!’

Climate Change Diverts Clergy From Their Proper Calling

Pell also believe that as Christian clergy succumb to what he describes as the ‘green fundamentalist faith’, this will reduce their effectiveness at proclaiming the Gospel of saving faith in Jesus, which is the core business of Jesus’ church.

Pell said:

Radical environmentalists are more than up to the task of moralizing their own agenda and imposing it on people through fear. They don’t need church leaders to help them with this, although it is a very effective way of further muting Christian witness

and

Jesus Christ didn’t say anything on global warming

so therefore, generally-speaking, neither should His ministers or disciples. Climate Change and Ecology should be issues of lesser importance to Christians.

Pell does not say that environmental issues are irrelevant for Christians – he is in favour of developing ‘clean’ (CO2 emission-free) power – but that environmental issues are second-order issues such as proclaiming faith in Jesus

There are many measures that are good for the environment that we should pursue… [but] I strive to argue rationally towards God the Creator, and reject substitutes

and inter-personal social issues such as marriage breakdown and abortion

It’s much less important than the faith of the five or ten or fifteen per cent of the poorest Australians; it’s much less important than the problem of marriage breakdown, it’s much less important than the problem of abortion.

Pell On Climate Change And Population

Pell strongly criticized the Medical Journal Of Australia for publishing a letter from Obstetrician Dr. Barry Walters, who proposed an annual Carbon tax on families with more than two children.

As the blog Cafe Theology reported, Pell, speaking in Seoul, where he was awarded the Mysterium Vitae Grand Prix award for his outstanding efforts for the pro-life movement, said

this is a striking illustration of where a minority neo-pagan, anti-human mentality, wants to take us

The connection from Pell’s views on Climate Change and Paganism to those of fertility are explicit, indicating Pell’s approach to Climate is integrated at the Theological rather than the Ecological level and it is the Theological level which forms the basis and context for his thinking about Climate, not the supposed ‘evidence’ from Skeptical sources which Pell adduces in a haphazard, opportunistic manner.

Pell explicitly rejects any connection between population and climate change. In a statement made during Catholic World Youth Day in July 2008 he said:

I’m a bit of a sceptic about the claim that human activity is likely to produce a man-made catastrophe. I’m well aware that over the years, there have been great changes in the climate.

The accommodation between this statement and the Catholic position on fertility is obvious.

Summarizing Pell On Climate

Pell rejects Climate Change because, for him, it interferes with the issues with are truly important: proclaiming the gospel, protecting society from false or empty religion and obedience to Catholic teaching on fertility.

He has collected a melange of disconnected factiods on Climate from Denialist sources which he spinkles into the public debate as an innoculation against the competing pagan faith of Climate Change. He does not attempt to integrate his melange into a cohesive explanation of Climate Change, being content to opportunistically misuse Climate data in the service of faith issues he feels are truly important.

Yet Pell presents himself as an open-minded inquirer who has carefully studied the issue of Climate Change while portraying Climate Change proponents as fear-mongering propogandists. He loosely associates himself with scientists as a means of cultivating the appearance of objectivity. These scientists are always Denialists.

He never corrects himself on Climate and makes no real effort to understand the arguments of Climate Change Proponents. He never contradicts specific denialist assertions, limiting himself to a vague statement that industrial activity must have some mild but insignificant effect on climate. This ‘concession’, while sincerely believed, is also projected to cultivate the appearance of objectivity.

I suspect Pell may be self-deluded. He may genuinely believe he has considered the evidence for Climate Change, but like all self-delusions, it falls to pieces as soon as the surface is scratched.

Get Your Game Together, George

I am somewaht disappointed in Pell. Any one of his specific assertions about Skeptic data can be disproved in five minutes by Googling the relevant counter-argument. It is apparent that Pell has not done basic cross-checking of Skeptic-sourced facts. In this way he has become an uncritical conduit for bad science and lazy commentary which serves the ‘ruthless commercial forces’ he so accurately said prey upon youth and society in general.

Pell’s community deserves better than that and as a custodian of an influential moral position which even non-Catholics respect, he is letting all of Australia down on this issue. He has become a patsy for the Denialists.

Pell must know that Climate is a particularly cutting-edge issue amongst youth. If Australian Catholic youth come to believe that their Cardinal is untrustworthy on Climate then he may just hasten the departure to Paganism he is so desperate to prevent.

In my opinion, it is in Pell’s interests that he upgrade his knowledge on Climate and correct his own record on the topic. In his shoes I would start immediately. Next time he is interviewed on Climate he should repudiate some of his own prior assertions such as those above. In this way he can gain proper credibility on Climate Change based on facts, not merely his position.

Last Word On Lyre Bird

I do not think Pell is a liar, but blinded and controlled by bias emenating from otherwise worthy motivations. I also suspect Pell possesses an innate conservatism unrelated to his Catholicism which may cause him to reject almost any progressive cause thus further predisposing Pell to deny Climate Change. It is this innate conservative which leads him to describe consider for the Climate Change thesis as a mere ‘enthusiasm’ which will soon pass.

But its time to wake up, George. Get that junk out of your nest.

Appendix

Here’s a great, brief encapsulation of argument against the Denialist position by David Karoly the brilliant Professor Of Earth Sciences at Melbourne University.

These have been sitting open in my browser for a bit, and I don’t feel like writing a bunch of posts to dole them out one-by-one, so here they are all at once: a moving-picture goulash of sorts.

A ridiculous cat lady. 2 minutes.

Source.

A creepy robot who mimics human facial features really well, and who reminds me of a particularly annoying theatre student I once knew.

David Attenborough’s introduction to the lyre bird, which can imitate any sound, kind of like Larvelle Jones from Police Academy. Both links ~3min, and the robot & lyre bird links came courtesy of delightful writer Hillery Hugg.

And finally, the best of the bunch, a four-year old boy getting his mind totally blown by a lobster, Whoa! Whoa! Wow! 2.5 minutes.

Thanks to dziga.

The Lyre Bird performes a mating ritual dance on its mound of dirt, this image captures the tail as the bird is dancing. Image taken on Kodachrome film.

The Lyre bird video from Heavy.com. Amazing mimicry abilities from this little singer.

I’ve been done with student teaching for two weeks now. Where has the time gone?

Well, the first week I had off was devoted to paper-writing, there was a few days devoted to oral-defense prep and job searching, I’ve spent a good number of days up in Minnesota, and then there was a couple days where I did absolutely nothing. It’s been nice. I even grew a beard for a while there, until I woke up and looked in the mirror and said to myself “you are living a lie – the bearded look is not for you.”

In vehicle-related news: I am dying to get the motorcycle out but a little worried that it’s going to need some work. I tried to tint my car windows but learned that people get paid to do that for a reason.

I’m trying to get a part-time job for the summer but my schedule is making that look impossible. As for the fall… I do not know what the heck is going to happen.

If you are a WCHS student reading this, study hard, and watch this (Lyre bird with more sounds!)…

I’m teaching Sound with both Junior Certs and Leaving Certs at the moment.It was pretty cool to have ready access to these amazing clipsSonic Boom: very useful when discussing the Doppler Effect.As usual there are loads of related clips: Lyre bird imitating a chain-saw.Not sure about the relevance, but this has to be seen (and heard) to be believed.    Finally a quick search for ‘Teaching Sound” brought up some nice ideas here:We need more of this – it’s so easy to exchange ideas. Thanks Mr Noon  

 This clip features the amazing Lyre Bird, a natural mimic that has not only mastered 30+ bird calls, but also camera shutters, car alarms, and chainsaws.  Better than that Police Academy guy, easy.

This amazing creature is named after the musical instrument because of the shape of its plumuge.

 One of the most amazing sights/sounds in nature – The Lyre Bird..enjoy

Censuur heeft zo ook zijn voordelen: de pareltjes waarop je stoot tijdens het rondzoeken.

Deze vogel werd vorig jaar, met ruime voorsprong op filmfragmenten met walvissen, gorilla’s, chimpansees en grizzly’s, verkozen tot “Favourite Attenborough moment”.

De man zei er zelf over:

“The ironic thing was that we eventually found a lyrebird that, having been imitating kookaburras and things like that, was then singing and performing in a forest that was being felled. So it was singing of its own doom, because it actually imitated the sound of chainsaws cutting down its own home.”

Every once in awhile someone sends me something that may not have to do with art or design, furniture or marketing..but is worth sharing.
This David Attenborough video of the amazing mimic, the Lyre Bird, is just that.
Ironically, he actually imitates the very sound of the chainsaws destroying his home as well as the camera shutter clicks of birders..

Take a look/listen:

Every once in awhile someone sends me something that may not have to do with art or design, furniture or marketing..but is worth sharing.
This David Attenborough video of the amazing mimic, the Lyre Bird, is just that.
Ironically, he actually imitates the very sound of the chainsaws destroying his home as well as the camera shutter clicks of birders..

Take a look/listen:

Sir David Attenborough is one of my favorites in Animal Planet. I have found one of this fantastic video clips of his show over YouTube.

The bird in this clip is called  a  lyre bird. Here are some of the information about this fantastic bird from South Australia (courtesy of Wikipedia):

A Lyrebird is either of two species of ground-dwelling Australian birds, most notable for their superb ability to mimic natural and artificial sounds from their environment. Lyrebirds have extraordinary plumes of neutral coloured tailfeathers.

Lyrebirds are among Australia’s best-known native birds, even though they are rarely seen in their natural habitat. As well as their extraordinary mimicking ability, lyrebirds are notable because of the striking beauty of the male bird’s huge tail when it is fanned out in display; and also because of their courtship display.

There are two species of Lyre bird: the superb lyre bird and the Albert’s lyre bird. In the video clip shown above, the lyre bird there is the superb lyre bird. These birds are known for their superb mimicry. What I found ironic or perhaps, saddening in the clip is that the male lyre bird imitates the sound of car alarm, camera shutter and chainsaw – an indication of human encroachment into his habitat. According to Sir David Attenborough, the lyre bird in the video imitated the sounds that he had found in his already vanishing habitat. Well, you can hear chainsaws in the parts of the forest where trees are felled right? Tsk.

Now, people who know me may be interested to know that I have a rather strong bird obsession.  I’m trying to picture when it started, but all I know is the obsession is growing.  I get extraordinarily excited when I see something unusual flying through the sky.  You know, birds of prey and the like…

I remember years ago, when I was living in Kent, looking out of my bedroom window and seeing a Green Parrot perched on the tree outside.  I nearly puked with excitement, and wandered about it for years.  It turned out to be a Ring-Necked Parakeet.  A flock of them escaped from somewhere in Kent, and now there are hundreds of them flying around like they own the place.  I see them all the time now, whenever I am home, and still can’t help but squeal like a small excited pig when I see them.  They look insane, just sitting there all Tropical and sexy, perched next to a run-of-the-mill Sparrow.  What would you do if a bunch of these badboys flew over your head squawking in the dead of winter?

Another favourite to see gliding through the sky like some giant prehistoric monster, is the Heron.  My family and I nickname him ‘Storky’.  In our heads it’s actually the same bird flying around the country and following us.  Our friend Storky.  We see him as a lucky sign.  He isn’t.  We’re the most unlucky family in the world.  But it’s a nice thought.  Once, my sister and I spotted him in Hyde Park, and we were luring him with some bread.  He LITERALLY did a Japanese Crane mystical sexual dance for us.  He liked us.  Anyway, LOOK AT HIM!

Now, in honour of my bird love, I am going to have a long, hard Google session, and pick out a couple of weird birds for you to enjoy:

The Malibu Stork (he’d rather sit indoors and cry than enjoy the Malibu sun I reckon).

The Condor (he might feed on your soul).

The Frogmouth (errrr can’t look without crying)

And here’s my personal favourite…

The Shoebill (Balaeniceps rex, also known as Whalehead…Yes.  Whalehead).

Yeah.  That’s a DUCK in it’s mouth.  Why is this so funny to me?  I’m not a nice person.

Oh and I found this on my travels.  WISH he was still alive.  I’d love to snuggle with him and let him lick my face:

Now.  Prepare yourself for the following video.  It’s the most phenomenal thing I’ve ever seen:

EDIT ALERT!  I posted the wrong video….THIS is the real one.

CLICKMYASS.