Turns out one of the main reasons that Merck is backing off on the Gardasil lobby is that the vaccinations as recommended may be pointless:

Lawmakers looking to force preteen girls to take Gardasil, a new vaccine against a virus that causes cervical cancer, are targeting the wrong age group, cancer data shows.

Middle-school girls inoculated with the breakthrough vaccine will be no older than 18 when they pass Gardasil’s five-year window of proven effectiveness — more than a decade before the typical cancer patient contracts the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV). emphasis mine --Ed.

Far be it for me to say, but with the known side effects being reported so far, from doctors who have given the shots to young girls, I question itÂ’s worth. Reports of seizures, blindness, episodes of passing out, tremors, memory problems, vision loss-are coming in at an alarming rate. Are these true side effects of the vaccine, or just the bad luck of coincidence for the young ladies? We donÂ’t know, yet. It takes many years of data collection and analysis to come up with an honest, medically sound answer.

One thing we do know: Condoms prevent the spread of ALL forms of HPV. Period. As well as other viral infections and disease. TheyÂ’re much cheaper and donÂ’t cause the serious side effects drugs cause. Why are little girls being mandated to get vaccinations that cause them harm, that do not guarantee freedom from the very disease the vaccine is said to protect against when we could mandate condom use for boys? DonÂ’t answer that because I know itÂ’s a stupid question. But for the love of GAWD peopleÂ…do we see a problem here?

Posted by: caltechgirl at 04:13 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 432 words, total size 3 kb.

Jeff Goldstein has been told in no uncertain terms that PJM doesn't want him anymore.

Why you ask?  Well, frankly, because he lost a lot of traffic when his site was down while he was dealing with that crazy left-wing whore who threatened his child and wife.

The screwing began with Dennis the Peasant and it hasn't stopped. Steve lays it out:

I'm only guessing, but the logical assumption is that the principals are going to get paid no matter what, while the investors and member bloggers who don't prosper in spite of joining PJM get the shaft. You know how this works. You saw The Producers, didn't you?

Michelle Malkin improved her traffic somewhat, no thanks to PJM, so she gets no pay cut. Instapundit's traffic stayed flat in spite of the dullest, laziest, most unnecessary and useless blogging in the top half of the ecosystem, so he gets no pay cut. PJM failed to drive traffic to Jeff, and for one reason or another he didn't generate it on his own, so Jeff takes a beating. Meanwhile, I'm sure he's grateful for all those print opportunities they rounded up for him. I know Raj and Rerun were busy, busy, busy every day, knocking on doors and handing out business cards, securing those MSM ins we heard so much about back before respectable folks like Larry Kudlow bailed out.

The investors get milked, the castle in the sky fails to materialize, Raj and Rerun feather their nests, and a top-notch writer has his valuable time wasted. Is that an incorrect assessment? If Pajamas Media were as transparent as the workings of a Cheney energy-policy session, maybe we would know. It's a good guess, though.

Jeff was distracted, because a vicious lunatic whore threatened his family and had to be dealt with, and maybe that hurt his traffic. But would that have mattered, had PJM been anything but a house of cards? Where is the synergy we used to hear about? Obviously, the PJs didn't pull their own weight, and now they care more about money than they do about Jeff taking time off to protect his wife and son.

It'll be a real fucking shame if Goldstein quits because PJM drops his paycheck.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:39 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.

Jen reminds that The Amazing Race is back, with an All-Star edition designed to erase the memories of the pathetic Family Edition season and two subsequent lackluster crap seasons.

So far?  Not bad.  I was super happy to see Charla and Mirna, Uchenna and Joyce, and Team Guido. 

My favorite team ever is sadly absent, the Clowns from Season 4 (Jon and Al).  In fact ALL of Season 4 is absent.  Too bad, as Season 4 was really my favorite personalities-wise, with the Chippendales, Whinies, SteveDave, the Goats, Weezer and Geezer, the Supremes, the Models, and Team Moleymoleymoleymoley (the virgins).

Posted by: caltechgirl at 03:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 104 words, total size 1 kb.

Researchers at the University of Calgary have discovered that the pregnancy associated hormone prolactin may be responsible for the reduction of MS symptoms usually occurring during pregnancy.

The study, published in the Journal of Neuroscience, indicated that prolactin could be used in people to repair damage caused by MS and improve their symptoms.

Pregnant mice had many more myelin-producing cells, known as oligodendrocytes, than virgin female mice of the same age, the study found.

The researchers destroyed myelin around the nerve cells in the mice, as occurs in MS. Two weeks later, the pregnant mice had twice as much new myelin as the other mice. When the scientists injected prolactin into the non-pregnant mice, their myelin similarly was repaired.

"The implications are that prolactin may be a molecule that can be tested in MS patients for stimulating repair," Samuel Weiss, director of the Hotchkiss Brain Institute at the University of Calgary and senior author of the study, said in an interview.

Prolactin increases in the body during pregnancy and is involved in stimulating milk production among other things.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 03:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.

And it's not because of the ear pain.  Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Moonbattery at its FINEST:

I knew in that moment that this was what the future of teaching about justice would include: teaching war criminals who sit glaring at me with hatred for daring to speak the truth of their atrocities and who, if paid to, would disappear, torture and kill me. I wondered that night how long I really have in this so called "free" country to teach my students and to be with my children and grandchildren.

These military and mercenary terrorist-students are trained in terrorist training camps all under the USA, funded by American taxpayers. In fact, people under the USA are "sacrificing" their healthcare and their children's educations while donating their tax dollars to these terrorist training camps. These terrorist camps train money hungry working class stiffs to murder, steal and plunder for the power
hungry US corporate war lords.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:01 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 551 words, total size 4 kb.

One of the things I find most useful in recovery from ANY illness is laughter. Especially the drop your teeth, wipe off the keyboard , run for the bathroom kind of laughter you find all over the net.

Today, I bring you three examples of such. And if you don't think it's that funny, you must excuse my sense of humor. It's high on cold medicine.

First up, political humor from Goldstein (too good to NOT steal)
"Q: Why did the Neocon cross the road?"

a. To push over an old woman and take away her healthcare subsidies
b. To beat those Dixie Chicks traitors with a tire iron
c. Because, though he was really hungry for the blood of an innocent brown person, he decided to settle for some McNuggets and a medium Diet Coke
d. THE MONIED JOOOS TOLD HIM TOO!
e. To burn down a Planned Parenthood, deny battered women a voice, and further the aims of the Christofascist Patriarchy
f. all of the above
g. none of the above
h. don't even look at me, you same-sex married homosexual gay fag

Finally, photoshop phun from Darleen.  Or should that be phrom Darleen?

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 2 kb.

The band name is a hockey penalty, the album name from a conversation with Victor Davis Hanson, the singer is a math nerd.

Five for Fighting, Two Lights

And John Ondrasik is on this week's Glenn and Helen Show.

I've been a big fan of 5fF for a long time, the Puppyblender, not so much, but it's a good interview, and interesting enough to listen to the entire thing.

Here's some Five For Fighting for your Thursday listening pleasure:
First, my favorite one, 100 years

And of course, the song that made the band big, Superman

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:56 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 2 kb.

1 How could I know you were a 5fF fan? I saw them at the Bumbershoot Festival a couple of years ago -- fantastic!

Posted by: Kj at February 15, 2007 01:45 PM (gHJSu)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So I am off to try to get some sleep, or else finish watching the Poirot movie I fell asleep to...

But I want to leave you with this:

Happy VD everybody!

h/t Sparkle via email.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:45 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

RSM hit me with this one. Took me a while, but who cares:

THE RULES: Each player of this game starts with the 6 weird things about you. People who get tagged need to write a blog of their own 6 weird things as well as state this rule clearly. In the end, you need to choose 6 people to be tagged and list their names. DonÂ’t forget to leave a comment that says you are taggedÂ’ in their comments and tell them to read your blog.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 10:15 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 260 words, total size 2 kb.

Stolen from the lovely Phoenix.....

1. Is your second toe longer than your first? yes
2. Do you have a favorite type of pen? Yep.  The PhD pens with the thick grip.  Otherwise, free pens are always nice.
3. Look at your planner for March 14, what are you doing? Sending out cards for Pi(e) Day!
4. What color are your toenails usually? Red. In honor of this dude.
5. What was the last thing you highlighted? The text above, to make it a linky.
6. What color are your bedroom curtains? White nasty vertical blinds, actually
7. What color are the seats in your car? grey leather
8. Have you ever had a black and white cat? Nope.  No cats.
9. What is the last thing you put a stamp on? Some papers I sent my Mom.
10. Do you know anyone who lives in Wyoming? I must... I know Hubby does.
11. Why did you withdraw cash from the ATM the last time? What is this ATM of which you speak?.
12. Who is the last baby that you held? OMG, I can't remember.  It's been a while!
13. Do you know of any twins with rhyming names? No. Most of them have the same initials, though (Laura and Lisa, Matt and Mark...).
14. Do you like Cinnamon toothpaste? No, but I love cinnamon ice cream.
15. What kind of car were you driving 2 years ago? The same one I'm driving now: my Silver Escape.
16. Pick one: Miami Hurricanes or Florida Gators. Neither.  Go Tar Heels!
17. Last time you went to Six Flags? Freshman year in college.
18. Do you have any wallpaper in your house? No.  Thank Jeebus.
19. Closest thing to you that is yellow? My Winnie Pooh and Schoolbus key chains.
20. Last person to give you a business card? My colleague who just got new ones.
21. Who is the last person you wrote a check to? My landlord.
22. Closest framed picture to you? Hubby and Princess.
23. Last time you had someone cook for you? Darlin, sweet hubby made Cream of Broccoli soup on Monday night.
24. Have you ever applied for welfare? No.
25. How many emails do you have? too many.  Do you really expect me to count?  I can't even tell you the number of addresses I have!
26. Last time you received flowers? Whenever Hubby found a dandelion on the lawn last :-)
27.Do you think the sanctity of marriage is meant for only a man &
woman? Huh?  What left field did this come out of?  Pac Bell Park?
29. Do you play air guitar? If the occasion warrants. And what happened to question #28?
30. Do you take anything in your coffee? 2 creams, 2 pink packets.
32. What is your high school's rival mascot? Depends on which rival... Indians, Cougars, Roughriders, Golden Eagles, Patriots, Bears.... and What happened to #31?
33. Last person you spoke to from high school? Hubby!
34. Last time you used hand sanitizer? I make it a policy not to in most cases.  Contributes to antibiotic resistant super bugs.
35. Would you like to learn to play the drums? Hells YEAH.
36. What color are the blinds in your living room? White Vertical blinds.
37. What is in your inbox at work? In my email inbox is a presentation I must give this afternoon.
38. Last thing you read in the newspaper? What newspaper?  Are you kidding?
39. What was the last pageant you attended? Does the Rose Parade count?.
40. What is the last place you bought pizza from? Pizza Slut.
41. Have you ever worn a crown? Of course.  See the Tiara Media button, top left!
42. What is the last thing you stapled? Paperwork for a student.
43. Did you ever drink Clear Pepsi? Yes.  It was weird.
44. Are you ticklish? EXTREMELY.
45.Last time you saw fireworks? last 4th of July I think.
46. Last time you had a Krispy Kreme doughnut? It was in North Carolina, so over a year and a half ago...
47. Who is the last person that left you a message & you actually returned their call? My IT director.
48. Last time you parked under a carport? Couple of years ago.
49. Do you have a black dog? Yep!
50.Do you have any pickles in your fridge? Yes. Claussen sandwich stackers, kosher dill or Garlic, not sure which flavor
51. Are you an aunt or uncle? An aunt to 2 nieces and 1 nephew.
52.Who has the prettiest eyes that you know of? Hubby.
53. Last time you saw a semi truck? On the way to work.
54. Do you remember Ugly Kidd Jo? yes.
55. Do you have a little black dress? Yep.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 01:41 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 808 words, total size 5 kb.

1 1. Is your second toe longer than your first? ~ who comes up with this shit? 2. Do you have a favorite type of pen? ~ not really 3. Look at your planner for March 14, what are you doing? ~ I don't have a planner, but I plan to get one... 4. What color are your toenails usually? ~ whatever color I was born with 5. What was the last thing you highlighted? ~ this list of stuff 6. What color are your bedroom curtains? ~ I don't have curtains, I have blinds 7. What color are the seats in your car? ~ grey 8. Have you ever had a black and white cat? ~ both 9. What is the last thing you put a stamp on? ~ an envelope 10. Do you know anyone who lives in Wyoming? ~ no 11. Why did you withdraw cash from the ATM the last time? ~ I haven't used an ATM since 2001 or 2002 12. Who is the last baby that you held? ~ I can't remember 13. Do you know of any twins with rhyming names? ~ Kareem and Tyheem, no shit 14. Do you like Cinnamon toothpaste? ~ who cares? 15. What kind of car were you driving 2 years ago? ~ none 16. Pick one: Miami Hurricanes or Florida Gators. ~ who cares? sports suck ass 17. Last time you went to Six Flags? ~ early 1990's 18. Do you have any wallpaper in your house? ~ no 19. Closest thing to you that is yellow? ~ the foot on the bottom of my birdy spring pen.... 20. Last person to give you a business card? ~ who the hell keeps up with that crap? 21. Who is the last person you wrote a check to? ~ I haven't had a checking account in years, so I don't remember 22. Closest framed picture to you? ~ my kids 23. Last time you had someone cook for you? ~ right now, so I'm going to eat when I'm done with this 24. Have you ever applied for welfare? ~ no 25. How many emails do you have? ~ unread, inbox, etc? be more specific... 26. Last time you received flowers? ~ ha! that never happens to me... 27. Do you think the sanctity of marriage is meant for only a man & woman? ~ marriage is just evil, period! 28. What left field did this come out of? ~ que? 29. Do you play air guitar? ~ never on purpose... 30. Do you take anything in your coffee? ~ 20% or so of the cup is sugar, at least 25% is cream... 31. Are you really reading these questions? ~ yeah, kinda 32. What is your high school's rival mascot? ~ a bird of some sort 33. Last person you spoke to from high school? ~ my best friend... 34. Last time you used hand sanitizer? ~ I don't use that shit 35. Would you like to learn to play the drums? ~ no 36. What color are the blinds in your living room? ~ almond or ivory, I can't tell, nor do I care... 37. What is in your inbox at work? ~ we don't have email accounts at my job... 38. Last thing you read in the newspaper? ~ I don't read the newspaper 39. What was the last pageant you attended? ~ never happened 40. What is the last place you bought pizza from? ~ does a pizza buffet count? 41. Have you ever worn a crown? ~ does the one from Burger King count? 42. What is the last thing you stapled? ~ a receipt to a money order stub 43. Did you ever drink Clear Pepsi? ~ yes, but only once.. Crystal Pepsi, by the way... 44. Are you ticklish? ~ no 45.Last time you saw fireworks? ~ when I plugged a cord into the wrong outlet... 46. Last time you had a Krispy Kreme doughnut? ~ last weekend 47. Who is the last person that left you a message & you actually returned their call? ~ this afternoon, but I actually called them before they finished the message... 48. Last time you parked under a carport? ~ a what? 49. Do you have a black dog? ~ no 50. Do you have any pickles in your fridge? ~ maybe, I don't open the refrigerator... 51. Are you an aunt or uncle? ~ an uncle, I think... 52. Who has the prettiest eyes that you know of? ~ mine 53. Last time you saw a semi truck? ~ this morning, on my way to work... 54. Do you remember Ugly Kidd Jo? ~ no 55. Do you have a little black dress? ~ no

Posted by: Thomas Warlock at February 07, 2007 03:41 PM (oy+Za)

2 I thought question 10 was weird, until I remembered how few of us Wyoming people there are. We're a rare breed, and must be honored properly.

Posted by: PaleoMedic at February 08, 2007 06:46 AM (xirX/)

3 You can sit by me PaleoMedic - I grew up in Wyoming and my folks still live there. ;-) I'm stealing this, CTG. Too fun! :-)

Posted by: Richmond at February 08, 2007 10:14 AM (e8QFP)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I've been on record for years saying that I'd cross party lines to vote for him for President, but the left seems to be too stupid to realize that UNITING this country means appealing to all facets of the political spectrum, something Joe seems to do almost universally.  Sure, the wingnuts hate him because he's a socially liberal demotard, and the moonbats hate him because he's a hawk and anti-abortion.

But his is the only consistent voice of conscience on the Hill, and for that, I respect him.  For this statement made to the Senate on Feb. 5, I respect him even more:

It is altogether proper that we debate our policy in Iraq. It should be a debate that is as serious as the situation in Iraq and that reflects the powers the Constitution gives to Congress in matters of war.

But that, sadly, is not the debate that the Warner-Levin resolution invites us to have. I am going to speak strongly against this resolution because I feel strongly about it. I do so with respect for my colleagues who have offered it, but I believe its passage would so compromise America's security, present and future, that I will say so in the clearest terms I can.

...

What we say here is being heard in Baghdad by Iraqi moderates, trying to decide whether the Americans will stand with them. We are being heard by our men and women in uniform, who will be interested to know whether we support the plan they have begun to carry out. We are being heard by the leaders of the thuggish regimes in Iran and Syria, and by Al Qaeda terrorists, eager for evidence that America's will is breaking. And we are being heard across America by our constituents, who are wondering if their Congress is capable of serious action, not just hollow posturing.

This resolution is not about Congress taking responsibility. It is the opposite. It is a resolution of irresolution.

For the Senate to take up a symbolic vote of no confidence on the eve of a decisive battle is unprecedented, but it is not inconsequential. It is an act which, I fear, will discourage our troops, hearten our enemies, and showcase our disunity. And that is why I will vote against cloture.

If you believe that General Petraeus and his new strategy have a reasonable chance of success in Iraq, then you should resolve to support him and his troops through the difficult days ahead. On the other hand, if you believe that this new strategy is flawed or that our cause is hopeless in Iraq, then you should vote to stop it. Vote to cut off funds. Vote for a binding timeline for American withdrawal. If that is where your convictions lie, then have the courage of your convictions to accept the consequences of your convictions. That would be a resolution.

...

We cannot have it both ways. We cannot vote full confidence in General Petraeus, but no confidence in his strategy. We cannot say that the troops have our full support, but disavow their mission on the eve of battle. This is what happens when you try to wage war by committee. That is why the Constitution gave that authority to the President as Commander in Chief.

Cynics may say this kind of thing happens all of the time in Congress. In this case, however, they are wrong. If it passed, this resolution would be unique in American legislative history. I contacted the Library of Congress on this question last week and was told that, never before, when American soldiers have been in harm's way, fighting and dying in a conflict that Congress had voted to authorize, has Congress turned around and passed a resolution like this, disapproving of a particular battlefield strategy.

I ask each of my colleagues to stop for a moment and consider this history carefully. Even during Vietnam, even after the Tet Offensive, even after the invasion of Cambodia, Congress did not take up a resolution like this one.

Past Congresses certainly debated wars. They argued heatedly about them. And they clashed directly with the Executive Branch over their execution. But in doing so they accepted the consequences of their convictions.

This resolution does no such thing. It is simply an expression of opinion. It does not pretend to have any substantive effect on policy on the ground in Iraq.

But again, I ask you: what will this resolution say to our soldiers? What will it say to our allies? And what will it say to our enemies?

We heard from General Petraeus during his confirmation hearing that war is a battle of wills. Our enemies believe that they are winning in Iraq today. They believe that they can outlast us; that, sooner or later, we will tire of this grinding conflict and go home. That is the lesson that Osama bin Laden took from our retreats from Lebanon and Somalia in the 1980s and 1990s. It is a belief at the core of the insurgency in Iraq, and at the core of radical Islam worldwide. And this resolution "by codifying our disunity, by disavowing the mission our troops are about to undertake" confirms our enemies' belief in American weakness.

This resolution also sends a terrible message to our allies. I agree that we must hold the Iraqi government to account. That is exactly what the resolution Senator McCain and I have offered would do. But I ask you: Imagine for a moment that you are a Sunni or Shia politician in Baghdad who wants the violence to end, and ask yourself how the Warner-Levin resolution will affect your thinking, your calculations of risk, your willingness to stand against the forces of extremism. Every day, you are threatened by enemies who want nothing but to inflict the most brutal imaginable horrors on you and your loved ones. Will this resolution empower you, or will it undermine you? Will it make you feel safer, or will it make you feel you should hedge your bets, or go over to the extremists, or leave the country?

And finally, what is the message this resolution sends to our soldiers? I know that everyone here supports our troops, but actions have consequences, often unintended. When we send a message of irresolution, it does not support our troops. When we renounce their mission, it does not support our troops.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 01:08 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 1126 words, total size 7 kb.

A crappy quiz....

Your Dominant Thinking Style: Modifying

Super logical and rational, you consider every fact available to you. You don't make rash decisions and are rarely moved by emotion. You prefer what's known and proven - to the new and untested. You tend to ground those around you and add stability.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 03:34 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I liked this quiz! Your Dominant Thinking Style: Experimenting You're all about looking at the facts, and you could always use more of them. You see life as your lab - and you're always trying out new things, people, and ideas. The master of mix and match, you're always coming up with unique combinations. You are good at getting a group to reach consensus.

Posted by: Theresa at February 06, 2007 05:12 PM (NGC/g)

2 Modifying... What's the deal with these pop-up windows on the links (Powered by SNAP)? They're extremely annoying.

Posted by: Thomas Warlock at February 06, 2007 09:09 PM (HSETr)

3 Your Dominant Thinking Style: Experimenting You're all about looking at the facts, and you could always use more of them. You see life as your lab - and you're always trying out new things, people, and ideas. The master of mix and match, you're always coming up with unique combinations. You are good at getting a group to reach consensus.

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at February 07, 2007 06:43 AM (+MvHD)

4 Heh. Cool... Modifying Super logical and rational, you consider every fact available to you. You don't make rash decisions and are rarely moved by emotion. You prefer what's known and proven - to the new and untested. You tend to ground those around you and add stability.

Posted by: Richmond at February 07, 2007 09:37 AM (e8QFP)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The words of a REAL CLIMATOLOGIST, which has nothing to do with inventing the internet.....

What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don't pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?

Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on.

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.

-- Thirty years ago many of the same scientists raising a ruckus today were DEAD SURE we were headed for a man-made ice age FROM THE SAME CAUSES (greenhouse gasses, etc.)

--Consensus is different from fact: 95% of 4 year olds believe in Santa, but this doesn't make him REAL, does it?  So why should we believe something just because a majority of pinheads with PhDs do?

And yes, for the record I too have a PhD.  So what?  But I'm not a pinhead.  Doesn't make me a sheep, either.

Please read all of Dr. Bell's article (yes, there is more. A lot more.),  It is a fascinating look at how popular politics colors even the most rigorous of disciplines.

h/t Q and O via RWV

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:19 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 674 words, total size 4 kb.

1 Excellent post.

Posted by: Ith at February 05, 2007 12:24 PM (1ZrPC)

2 wait... what do you mean Santa isn't real?

Posted by: wRitErsbLock at February 05, 2007 12:42 PM (+MvHD)

3 You take that back, Santa is real. I've writen him a letter each year for the past 27 years. He hasn't responded yet because he's very busy keeping those elves in line, trying to keep things warm at the north pole. It's hard to relax with a lemonade when they drink freezes immediately.

Posted by: Bill at February 05, 2007 02:43 PM (bpbQx)

4 Exactly... I remember the global cooling (they called it "nuclear winter") phase very well. It was as idiotic then as this is now. As to the "why do these people all jump on the bandwagon without tangible facts?" well, that's easy... always follow the money. There's money in the global warming scare - lots and lots of lovely cash. Facts be damned - it's who gets the paid the most and has the most money to lose... they fight the hardest for their position.

Posted by: Teresa at February 05, 2007 04:10 PM (gsbs5)

5 good one CTG

Posted by: Jane at February 06, 2007 05:25 AM (YadGF)

6 LOL at Beth!! This is a great article. "As Lindzen said many years ago: "the consensus was reached before the research had even begun." Now, any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic, when in fact they are simply being good scientists. This has reached frightening levels with these scientists now being called climate change denier with all the holocaust connotations of that word. The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted. Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention. Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information." True scientists must be appalled by what's going on. From what I understand, the sun's temperature has increased too (not that you'd know it in the northeast right now). I'm no scientist, but who are we to think that our tiny little speck in the galaxy is experiencing climate change thanks to us? Aren't there at least a gazillion other variables to consider? Why does that idea seem to be rocket science? (Snarky aside: Oh, and did you see the IMDB rating on Gore's film? 8.2/10 Ooooh. Peace-prize worthy, huh?)

Posted by: Marie at February 06, 2007 07:06 AM (keaCm)

7 I don't know, that global cooling sure would explain about the local temps of late.

Posted by: Contagion at February 06, 2007 03:38 PM (72Ov0)

8 Thanks for the "ammo" for my debates.

Posted by: Crassus at February 07, 2007 05:40 AM (8RyYg)

9 When you pull your collective heads out of the sand, you'll be baked at just the right temperature. You're all idiots.

Posted by: googoodolly at February 09, 2007 10:44 PM (B4coE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

From Troy, MI:

Troy, a high-income city of just 80,000 people and home to [Michigan's] only Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue department stores, now has another distinction. It is the only non-resort city of its size to have two Hooters.

"You come directly off the interstate and that's the first thing you come to," said Wade Fleming, a councilman who voted in June to reject the transfer of a liquor licence to the new Hooters restaurant from a rundown tavern that once operated at the same location. "That starts to define Troy, I think, and that's not how we'd like to define Troy."

Hooters executives want just one restaurant in Troy but the company won't close the old one until it's allowed to serve alcohol at the new restaurant, which opened Monday on a larger, more visible site.

Critics are concerned that the restaurants' scantily clad servers don't fit the image the city seeks to project in its Big Beaver commercial district." (emphasis mine- Ed.)

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:05 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.

Now, two:

Two Names You Go By:
1. CTG
2. Professor

Two Parts of Your Heritage:
1. Armenian
2. Scots-Irish

Two Things You Are Wearing Right Now:
1. Green zip-neck sweater
2. my wedding ring

Two Things You Would Want in a Relationship:
1. Love
2. Humor

Two of Your Favorite Hobbies:
1. singing
2. crocheting

Two Things You Want Really Badly At The Moment:
1. to go home and take a nap
2. a sh*tload of $$ so I could quit work

Two Pets You Had/Have:
1. My Princess
2. a rat

Two people you talked to today:
1. My boss
2. Hubby

Two things you did last night:
1. Watched TV
2. slept

Two people that live in your house:
1. Hubby
2. The Princess (she THINKS she's a people)

Two things you ate today:
1. Trail mix
2. water

Two people you miss:
1. Dad
2. my friend A

Two things you're doing tomorrow:
1. Curriculum committee meeting
2. watching TV

Two vacations youÂ’ve been on:
1. Miami (Orange Bowl)
2. Disneyland

Two Favorite Holidays:
1. Christmas
2. My Birthday

Two favorite Alcoholic beverages:
1. Coffee Colada (Pina Colada with Kahlua)
2. Stoli Vanil and just about anything (try it with Cherry coke!)

Two bands you have seen live:
1. Barenaked Ladies
2. Depeche Mode

Two things you will do after you finish this survey:
1. set up a volunteer experience for my students
2. go home

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:58 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 1 kb.

A meme stolen from Rachel:

This Moment: tired

Your Shoes: favorites

Craving: sleep

The State of Your Home: mess

Annoyed By: idiots

Noise In the Background: radio

Really Want To: go home

Thinking about: email

Smelling: coffee

Favorite Product In Office Supply Aisle: post its

DonÂ’t Ever Want To: die

Your Eye Color: hazel

The Weather: cloudy

Have Never Tried: snowboarding

Think Everyone Should Try: cranberry juice

Last Vacation Destination: TN

The Last Thing You Had to Drink: coffee

Your Bad Habit: swearing

What YouÂ’re Going To Do Now: blogreading

feel free to copy this if you're bored too!

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:56 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 103 words, total size 1 kb.

FTFO.  And Die.  With Knobs.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 12:30 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

From a former diplomat specializing in the area.  The writer begins:

"Sen. Hillary Clinton declared this weekend, "I'm in to win." Anyone who has watched her remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency. I wish she felt the same way about the war."

· We are at war. America faces an existential threat. This is not, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has claimed, a "situation to be solved." It would be nice if we could wake up tomorrow and say, as Sen. Barack Obama suggested at a Jan. 11 hearing, "Enough is enough." Wishing doesn't make it so. We will have to fight these terrorists to the death somewhere, sometime. We can't negotiate with them or "solve" their jihad. If we quit in Iraq now, we must get ready for a harder, longer, more deadly struggle later.

· Quitting helps the terrorists. Few politicians want to be known as spokesmen for retreat. Instead we hear such words as "redeployment," "drawdown" or "troop cap." Let's be clear: If we restrict the ability of our troops to fight and win this war, we help the terrorists. Don't take my word for it. Read the plans of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Ayman Zawahiri to drive America from Iraq, establish a base for al-Qaeda and spread jihad across the Middle East. The terrorists are counting on us to lose our will and retreat under pressure. We're in danger of proving them right.

· Beware the polls. In November the American people expressed serious concerns about Iraq (and about Republican corruption and scandals). They did not say that they want us to lose this war. They did not say that they want us to allow Iraq to become a base for al-Qaeda to conduct global terrorist operations. They did not say that they would rather we fight the terrorists here at home. Until you see a poll that asks those questions, don't use election results as an excuse to retreat.

· Retreat from Iraq hurts us in the broader war. We are fighting the war on terrorism with allies across the globe, leaders such as Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan and Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. Brave activists are also standing with us, fighting for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the empowerment of women. They risk their lives every day to defeat the forces of terrorism. They can't win without us, and many of them won't continue to fight if they believe we're abandoning them. Politicians urging America to quit in Iraq should explain how we win the war on terrorism once we've scared all of our allies away....

· Our soldiers will win if we let them. Read their blogs. Talk to them. They know that free people must fight to defend their freedom. No force on Earth -- especially not an army of terrorists and insurgents -- can defeat our soldiers militarily. American troops will win if we show even one-tenth the courage here at home that they show every day on the battlefield. And by the way, you cannot wish failure on our soldiers' mission and claim, at the same time, to be supporting the troops. It just doesn't compute.

You can not negotiate with Terrorists unless you speak their language: senseless violence and unwavering resolve.  Read the rest of this fabulous piece here.

The author of this piece?  Liz Cheney, former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.  And yes, that Cheney.

h/t Dafydd

Posted by: caltechgirl at 08:45 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 644 words, total size 4 kb.

Happy Birthday to the Proprietor of ManCamp!

42 is the answer, Val.  Just remember that.

Posted by: caltechgirl at 11:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

Kate tagged me with the My, Me, Meme.

So here goes:
This one's easy, since it's all about you and since it requires you to write the very first answer that comes to mind. Simply copy and paste the following three questions then answer them on your blog or, if you don't have a blog of your own, answer them in the comments here. Bloggers should then tag three other people to answer the questions as well, and be sure they know who to blame (Me!).
1. My: You've heard the saying "I'd give my right arm for"�. So, what would you give your right arm for?
2. Me: What's one word that describes how you want people to see you?
3. Meme: If you could be any blogger, which blogger would you be? and why?

My answers:
1. My: You've heard the saying "I'd give my right arm for"�. So, what would you give your right arm for?
I like my right arm a hell of a lot. Not sure what I'd actually give my right arm for.

Me: What's one word that describes how you want people to see you?
Brilliant

3. Meme: If you could be any blogger, which blogger would you be? and why?
Any blogger who makes a hell of a lot of $$ just cruising the internet (assuming such existed...)

And now I get to tag three people, so I tag Rachel, Beth, and Bou

Posted by: caltechgirl at 08:19 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 242 words, total size 2 kb.