Saturday, August 8, 2009

"Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young Were Right...We HAVE All Been Here Before..."

If I had it to do all over again, I think I would have enjoyed being a history teacher.

Because while I can respect a good healthy “keep your eyes on the horizon” point of view when it comes to life, I think the past offers up a pretty good schematic for those with the wisdom to read it.

George Santayana was one of those with the wisdom.

Oh, by the way, youngsters, that’s George Santayana, the poet and philosopher.

Not the guitarist.

That’s Carlos Santana.

As fate would have it, though, Santayana and Santana both, in their own unique ways, espoused the same generic philosophy.

Carlos sang “you got to change your evil ways, baby…”

George wrote…

“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it….”

This just in…


(CNN) -- U.S. scientists monitoring shrinking glaciers in Washington and Alaska reported this week that a major meltdown is under way.

A 50-year government study found that the world's glaciers are melting at a rapid and alarming rate. The ongoing study is the latest in a series of reports that found glaciers worldwide are melting faster than anyone had predicted they would just a few years ago. It offers a clear indication of an accelerating climate change and warming earth, according to the authors.

Since 1959, the U.S. Geological Survey, which published the study on its Web site, has been tracking the movements of the South Cascade glacier in Washington and the Wolverine and Gulcana glaciers in Alaska. The three glaciers are considered "benchmarks" for the conditions of thousands of other glaciers because they're in different climate zones and at various elevations.

"These changes are taking place in Washington State and Alaska in three different climate regimes," said Edward Josberger, the lead researcher on the study with the USGS Washington Water Science Center in Tacoma, Washington. "So we feel it's definitely something going on, probably on a global scale, and of course, if you look at other such measurements around the world and put it all together, yes, glaciers are retreating and retreating rapidly."

In a telephone interview with CNN, Josberger called the unprecedented glacial melt the "canary in the coal mine."

The half-century record contains measurements of the amount of snow that has fallen on the glaciers each winter and on how much ice has melted off each summer. The data give scientists a sense of whether the glacier is getting more "healthy" or losing mass, Josberger said. They also indicate what's happening to mountain glaciers in other parts of the world, the scientist said.

"We feel it's definitely the signature of global change and climate warming," Josberger said.

The melt of glaciers is resulting in higher sea levels and affecting ecosystems and the rivers that emanate from these glaciers, Josberger said. "In terms of water supply available for people, Anchorage is fed by two glacially fed lakes. There are some very strong impacts that could happen."

The rate at which a glacier melts depends on its thickness and mass and, of course, on the temperature. Even small changes in temperature of only one to two degrees can have a significant impact on the environment, according the the National Weather Service.

"We've been using this 50-year record to interpret the changes or the response of glaciers to climate change," Josberger said. "Basically, in the past 10, 15 or 20 years these three glaciers are wasting away. The melting has far exceeded the amount of snow that falls on them in the winter, so they're retreating far up valley. And this retreat is taking place all over the Pacific Northwest and Alaska."

For example, Washington's South Cascade glacier has lost half its volume since 1960 and is predicted to lose half its current volume in 100 years.

And, if the canary analogy proves true, the ice retreat is likely occurring all over the world, too, he said.

Glacier melt will likely continue and, as it does, sea levels around the world are expected to continue rising. And that could affect people in low-lying coastal communities, forcing them from their homes and further inland, experts say.


I just, this week, came across the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” which special effectingly dazzles the brain with the fictional story of what will happen to the world when global warming finally gets down to bizness.

It’s a pretty cool movie.

So entertaining, in fact, that you actually don’t so much mind that the “star” is Dennis Quaid.

I’m not a scientist or geothermic expert, so I won’t patronize you by offering up my ratification or rejection of the theory of what’s coming.

I’ll just offer you this thought…

Santana sang it, Santayana wrote it, but both of them made a fair point.

Ignoring that which has come before is pretty much assuring the same outcome the next time around.

Wait a second, you’re thinking, what the hell?

We’ve never faced this “theoretical” threat to a planet before.

Au contrare, mon frare’

Action Comics, Issue #182.

Carlos, George…

…meet Jor-El.

"...BTW, The Whole TIT Thing is TMI, AFAICS..."

One sure sign that you are falling behind when it comes to keeping up with culture is not knowing your acronyms.

LOL means laugh out loud.

ROFL means rolling on the floor laughing

LMAO means laughing my ass off.

By the way, if you don’t know where these acronyms are used, don’t waste your time learning them.

You’re already so far behind that the family will be standing around you in a circle with roses in their hands by the time you catch up.

Regardless of your hip and/or savvy level, here’s an acronym I bet, no matter your age or social strata, you know.

TMI.

Its translation is simple and basic. Its creation, I imagine, was inevitable, a by-product of the need we seem to have developed in the last few years to absorb all the minutiae we can in any given twenty four hour period.

Ironic, given that the acronym itself indicates that, saints be praised, there is still some perception of a limit on the amount of useless shit cluttering up our synapses.

For example…


(People.com) -- After starting a new workout regimen three months ago, "The View's" Sherri Shepherd made a splash on the daytime talk show by revealing her new bathing suit body.
But there's one part of her figure she'd never want to change.


"I love my boobs!" says Shepherd, 42, who lost four inches from her chest during her two-month weight loss challenge but still wears a DD cup.

Would she ever consider a breast reduction now that she's getting back into shape?

"What?! No! I would never ever, ever, ever," says Shepherd, whose measurements are 40-33-37. "I don't care how old they get and how long they get, I'm going to love my boobs. I'd never get rid of them."

Not that she's anti-surgery in general. "I have a little muffin top from my C-section," says Shepherd. "I said if I can keep this weight loss up for a year, I'm getting my tummy tuck."



This history-altering bit of information came to me by way of perusing the CNN.com home page.


And I might not have given it a second glance had it not been for the headline that trumpeted the story:

“SHERRI SHEPPARD REFUSES TO GET A BREAST REDUCTION.”

If you read my work regularly, then you already know where this is going.

For those of you dropping by for the first time, welcome.

And here’s where this is going…

It’s pathetic enough that this kind of information is deemed worthy of being reported as legitimate “news”, without insulted intelligence being added to injury with the approach.

How about…

“SHERRI SHEPPARD ACCOMPLISHES MAJOR WEIGHT LOSS.”?
Or…
“SHERRI SHEPPARD GIVES UP JUNK FOOD FOR LOVE OF CHILD”?

Even from those points of view, it would be a questionable “news item”.

Millions of people work hard, give up the Drake’s Cakes and lose weight every day.

I don’t see any news stories about them.

Unless the weight loss is over, say, five hundred pounds and a Filipino family is discovered living in the tucks of the former fatty.

I think we all applaud Sherri Sheppard’s success.

And I think we all could cut enough slack, given her minor celebrity, to concede that her efforts to get healthy makes for a nice, ideally brief, human interest story.

But that’s apparently not the news.

She lost some weight.

But the headline cries that she is standing firm on the issue of breast reduction.

That pun was totally inevitable, swear to God.

I object to that approach on a couple of levels.

First, it cheapens what little genuine value there is in the story in the first place.

Second, it denies men a basic human right.

It’s our job to be fixated on breasts, not the culture’s.

I totally get that the 24/7 media world we live in necessitates a need for “news” space to be filled.

And when it comes to somebody accomplishing something many of us envy, the case can be made its worth a few lines on the homepage.

But the whole “keep my boobs” business is…wait for it…TMI.

And when it comes to that kind of crap clogging up my cerebral hard drive, I say that those shoveling it out need to just STFU.

EOD.