C o l l i n a R o s s a
ME R I Z Z O
d i V i l l a f r a n c a i n L u n i g i a n a ( M S )
1945 – 2009
EDOARDO BASSIGNANI « EBIO »
Commemorazione per il 64°Anniversario della morte del Comandante «Ebio»
alle ore 10..00
Al termine dell’incontro sarà offerto un buffet ai partecipanti
Ora e sempre Resistenza
Info: 340.6179076 – 348.9898937 – www.archividellaresistenza.it – email@example.com
Sounds like a great idea…but there isn’t actually a lot about uncertainty, in the programme (look at what session A is supposed to be about, and what the speakers will in fact cover)
Climate and Uncertainty Symposium –
Date and time
Monday 16th February 2009, 10:00-17:00 with poster session and drinks to follow.
Wilkins Gustave Tuck Lecture Theatre (UCL, London).
The aim of this meeting is to bring together a wide spectrum of UCL researchers to discuss issues of uncertainty in climate predictions and the impact of those uncertainties on our ability to accurately forecast the effects of climate change on urban and natural systems, human health and public policy. The meeting will encompass perspectives and open discussion on climate uncertainty from information providers (e.g. climate / ocean modellers), method providers (e.g. statisticians) and users of outputs (e.g. climate impacts and policy researchers).
SESSION A – CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS: talks articulating the issues and questions arising in different application areas. Talks focus on what are the key questions about future climate in the different areas, how climate information is used, what sources of uncertainty have been identified as being of particular concern and what steps are being taken to address this.
SESSION B – INFORMATION PROVISION: talks focusing on research that aims to meet the needs of the applications community: what information and techniques are available, what are the limitations, where is the potential for improvement in current practice?
UCL Environment Institute – Public Lecture Series 2008-09
“Climate Change: Science and the Way Forward”
Professor John Beddington
Chief Scientific Adviser to HM Government
4th February 2009 6 – 8pm, Chadwick LT (Click here for map location: E4)
Over the coming decades, humankind will be presented with some enormous and interlinked challenges such as population growth, urbanisation and food, water and energy security; and the enormity of the task to address these linked issues will be made all the greater by changes to the Earth’s climate. A successful strategy will take the form of a co-ordinated, holistic and integrated approach. This lecture will outline these challenges, focus on the importance of collaboration between science disciplines and between countries and describe a number of the science and technology solutions available to us.
Professor John Beddington was appointed as Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA) on 1 January 2008. John’s main research interests are the application of biological and economic analysis to problems of Natural Resource Management including inter alia: fisheries, pest control, wildlife management and the control of disease. He started his academic career at the University of York and spent three years on secondment from York as a Senior Fellow with the International Institute of Environment and Development. He has been at Imperial College since 1984, where he headed the main departments dealing with environmental science and technology. He was Professor of Applied Population Biology at Imperial until his appointment as GCSA.
He has been adviser to a number of government departments, including the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (on Antarctic and South Atlantic matters), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (where he chaired the Science Advisory Council), the Department for International Development, the Ministry of Defence and the Cabinet Office. He was for six years a member of the Natural Environment Research Council.
He has acted as a senior adviser to several government and international bodies, including the Australian, New Zealand and US Governments, the European Commission, the United Nations Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organisation. In June 1997 he was awarded the Heidelberg Award for Environmental Excellence and in 2001 he became a Fellow of the Royal Society. In 2004 he was awarded the Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George by the Queen for services to fisheries science and management.
Catastrophism, the pumping up of dangers of all sorts as if the world would end tomorrow unless we all follow the catastrophist’s opinions, must have been with humanity since the first time somebody was able to foretell a solar eclipse.
Three of the dangers it carries must have been well known for almost as long:
Crying wolf is the best way to make sure nobody will do a thing when a really bad situation will happen
Lurid climate-related material is just as easily forgotten, and may convince the listener or reader that there is nothing at all one could do on the topic
There is no definite line between those who proclaim the world is going to the dogs because of “A”, and those who take advantage of “A” in order to grab as much power as they can
There is however a fourth danger for whom awareness is slowly emerging:
Spreading rumors about the planet becoming a hellish place because of person A”s behaviour, can and does often inspire somebody else to pick up arms and forcefully get rid of person A
A couple of examples from outside the climate arena:
In “Understanding Race and Crime“, Colin Webster suggests that behind the Rwandan genocide there was no actual overpopulation (or lack of resources), rather their myth (=perception), the idea that despite much evidence to the contrary, there would have shortly been a major crisis
In “Coming Chaos? Maybe not“, Michael W Foley makes the point that crisis-motivated “violence is not a matter of social banditry but is politically organized […] In New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, the hysterical news reports to the contrary, violence was almost wholly the work of white vigilantes inspired by those same reports to ‘defend’ their communities against supposed looters“
The two authors are making the same point: the main motivation for the violence is in the people’s conviction that things are going pretty badly indeed, and they have to do something, however illegal or immoral.
So next time somebody will try to argue that it is our duty to consider mostly worst-case scenarios, I will just remind them: catastrophism, with all its baggage of unintended consequences, is a Pandora’s box. With Hope removed.
…e quindi c’e’ chi si sente in dovere di difenderla…
il presidente dei ristoratori della locale Ascom, Benedetto Stefani, spezza una lancia in favore della giunta: «Nessuna crociata, si vuole solo tutelare la specificità della nostra cucina, messa in pericolo dalle recenti liberalizzazione del settore »
insomma neanche gli indigeni vogliono mangiare la specificita’ , per cui vanno obbligati
La prima cosa da dire riguardo le polemiche sul Vescovo Lefebvriano Williamson, che ha deciso qualche tempo fa di parlare a una televisione svedese delle sue idee sull’Olocausto, e’ che sara’ molto difficile capire chi abbia voluto fare cosa. E quindi bisogna consolarsi con delle ipotesi.
Cosa pensare infatti della comparsa dell’intervista proprio adesso e non, per esempio, un mese fa quando gia’ era datata, o del fatto che succeda tutto a ore di distanza dal Giorno della Memoria?
Il barrage di commenti e’ ovviamente inutile (sarebbe curioso il giorno in cui un Papa cambiasse idea dopo aver letto questo o quel giornale). E quindi rimane solo l’ovvio: Williamson ha dimostrato che ci sono delle anime povere anche fra i Vescovi.
What to say about the controversy on Lefebvre follower Bishop Williamson, who spoke to a Swedish television crew of his ideas on the Holocaust? First and foremost, that it will be very difficult to see who did what and why.
What to think of coincidences such as the interview appearing right now and not, for example, a month ago when it was already dated; or that everything is happening hours away from the International Holocaust Memorial Day?
The barrage of comments on the topic in the media is obviously futile (it would a curious day when a Pope will change his mind after reading this or that newspaper). What are we left with but the obvious: Williamson has shown that there are some poor souls even among the Bishops.
“Schizocronia” è un termine che sarebbe doveroso introdurre nel dizionario della lingua italiana. Dal greco antico schizein (“per parti separate“) e chronos (“tempo“), andrebbe definito come “un disturbo della comunicazione scientifica in genere caratterizzato da confusione tra la realtà di ciò che accade adesso, e la possibilità di ciò che potrebbe accadere decenni più tardi”. Andrebbe poi specificato che “la schizocronia è associata con il pensiero catastrofista e potrebbe avere una causa politica di fondo”.[…]
“Biancheria intima e villaggi vacanze sì, ma guai a chiedere uno spazio pubblicitario e a usarlo per dire che Dio non esiste. Sembra che in questo paese non ci sia spazio per dichiararsi atei, che sia qualcosa di cui parlare con vergogna, o non parlare affatto, pena la censura. Alla Igp vorremmo chiedere se direbbero davvero di no a uno slogan che sostiene che Dio esiste”, ha detto Raffaele Carcano, segretario generale della [Unione degli atei e degli agnostici razionalisti]
Razionalisti forse, ma razionali proprio no…possibile che a nessuno di loro sia venuto in mente di controllare perche’ l’analoga iniziativa in Inghilterra conteneva il testo “Probabilmente non c’e’ nessun Dio” invece che “Non c’e’ nessun Dio“: perche’, altrimenti, sarebbe stata cestinata anche li’.
Non e’ certo la prima volta che attivisti atei in Italia dimostrano di non avere “santi in Paradiso”…che magari avrebbero potuto consigliare loro di limitarsi a un peraltro efficacissimo “Che Dio esista o meno“. Efficacissimo, almeno, se prendiamo per buona l’idea che la Uaar sia solo interessata a mostrare che per comportarsi moralmente e civilmente non occorra credere in una Divinita’.
No surplus of scruples, in the Israeli Government…now they are not even trying to hide the fact that all 22 days of Gaza bombing may have been a last-chance effort at pounding Hamas and the Palestinians, before Obama could stop everything.
My mind is clearer now.
At last all too well
I can see where we all soon will be.
If you strip away The myth from the man,
You will see where we all soon will be. Barack!
You’ve started to believe
The things they say of you.
You really do believe
This talk of Change is true.
And all the good you’ve done
Will soon get swept away.
You’ve begun to matter more
Than the things you say.
Listen Barack I don’t like what I see.
All I ask is that you listen to me…
One important point concerning the above is that it is too easy to explain it as an “act of evil” by “terrorist” or “quasi-terrorist” organizations such as Hamas and Fatah. It should go without saying that any strategy long-sustained by different persons must have an underlying logic (however twisted). And one of the reasons why Hamas (and Fatah) are not even trying to lessen the number of Palestinian deaths makes perfect, twisted sense considering the particular situation in Palestine.
When Armenia attacked Azerbaijan to keep control of Nagorno-Karabach for example, there was an Armenian side, an Azeri side, and a piece of land they were fighting about. Likewise for Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, where the piece of land was the whole of Kuwait; and for Argentina trying to regain the Malvinas/Falklands.
In the case of Palestine, it’s the weaker side that yells about grabbing the enemy’s land, and all of it, but without a “motherland” where to start from. And such an idea has become such an overwhelming goal, that everything else is getting absolutely disregarded: including the tiny piece of land they actually do have.
The Palestinians under Hamas are being lead into pretending they don’t have a land (Gaza), in order to get a land (Israel). Nothing gets built, and living conditions deteriorate. True, there is an Israeli blockade but (a) if weapons are routinely smuggled in, there should some sign of at least of an attempt at doing something; and (b) it’s not by shooting rockets at random that you’ll free yourself from a blockade.
What I am saying goes even beyond that, though. Fatah (and Hamas) clearly do not see Gaza or the settlement-free areas of the West Bank at all as their homeland, and are bound to ruin and pillage them all as the “real thing” is either East Jerusalem and/or the whole of Israel.
Like the driver of a rental (therefore, temporary) car, they will do very little to keep their own stuff clean. And to protect their own people.
In fact, I cannot see any bigger threat to the existence of Hamas (and Fatah) than if peace were to happen: suddenly, after decades focused together by a common enemy, the various forces on the Palestinian side will feel absolutely and finally free. I do not think that’ll be a good spectacle to watch.
Right now instead, with Gaza the wrong side of hell, Hamas is comfortably certain that no Gazan will dream of the status quo: and further war (and power to Hamas) is guaranteed.
Can a sane solution to the Palestine problem be found among Gaza (and West Bank) inhabitants? Only if a miracle will happen. Still, it is not impossible. If your neighbor is polluting whatever land you’ve got: if you don’t clean it, who will?
A chance for some clarification on previousblogs of mine. Let’s start from the Israeli side.
I do consider myself a “friend of Israel” (as if any Israeli would care) as I do not find any other meaningful way for a European born in the 1960s to relate to the Jewish state. It’s not that anyone in my family has participated in the killing or even the persecution of Jews in the 1930s/1940s (none has, as far as I know…but then, few if any of them had any chance to do bad, or good at the time).
So it’s not a matter of atonement as much as a point of decency: if the culture I was born in as European killed itself and six million Jews in the process (plus a lot of Russians, homosexuals, roma etc etc), it has to be beyond me to make any judgement against the right of the Jews to live in the one state where they would not feel persecuted.
That said, it is as a friend of Israel that I feel great sadness in seeing a country built upon such an ideal, to end up persecuting a people. Something has gone very wrong, as it is obvious when the main reason for a war and 1,000 dead are two democratic elections: the one bringing Obama to the White House, and the one taking place in a few weeks in Israel itself. The former, providing the Olmert Government with the incentive of doing something before the new US President vetoes anything; and the latter, providing it with the incenting of doing something in order not to appear weak next to the fiery intentions of Bibi Netanyahu.
I do not believe your sanity can survive your willing brutalization of somebody living next door. Such a blatant show as these days’, of electoral prowess built upon hundreds and hundreds of corpses, is for me the most recent evidence that, if the state of Israel were a person, it would have been long diagnosed with a plethora of neuroses.
I am ware of the fact that peace may be dangerous for the very existence of Israel as the one State for the Jews, as it would “call the bluff” on many contradictions of the Israeli society. Still, with all its collective mental illness Israel is a democratic nation: as such, it’s the only place where a sane solution to the Palestine problem could surface without any divine intervention (=miracle).
Somebody, please, rise to the challenge, before the brutalization bite back. If you keep teaching your guys how to kill their neighbors physically and politically, you run a very high risk that some of them will start killing their own people, physically and politically.
A guest blog by writer and researcher Gregory Fegel (gregoryfegel AT hevanet DOT com). Provided “as-is” in order to enrich the debate, whatever my opinions on the topic are.
Surely everybody believing in using the Precautionary Principle will agree with these words?
the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.
Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age
The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.
Ice cores, ocean sediment cores, the geologic record, and studies of ancient plant and animal populations all demonstrate a regular cyclic pattern of Ice Age glacial maximums which each last about 100,000 years, separated by intervening warm interglacials, each lasting about 12,000 years.
Most of the long-term climate data collected from various sources also shows a strong correlation with the three astronomical cycles which are together known as the Milankovich cycles. The three Milankovich cycles include the tilt of the earth, which varies over a 41,000 year period; the shape of the earth’s orbit, which changes over a period of 100,000 years; and the Precession of the Equinoxes, also known as the earth’s ‘wobble’, which gradually rotates the direction of the earth’s axis over a period of 26,000 years. According to the Milankovich theory of Ice Age causation, these three astronomical cycles, each of which effects the amount of solar radiation which reaches the earth, act together to produce the cycle of cold Ice Age maximums and warm interglacials.
Elements of the astronomical theory of Ice Age causation were first presented by the French mathematician Joseph Adhemar in 1842, it was developed further by the English prodigy Joseph Croll in 1875, and the theory was established in its present form by the Czech mathematician Milutin Milankovich in the 1920s and 30s. In 1976 the prestigious journal “Science” published a landmark paper by John Imbrie, James Hays, and Nicholas Shackleton entitled “Variations in the Earth’s orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages,” which described the correlation which the trio of scientist/authors had found between the climate data obtained from ocean sediment cores and the patterns of the astronomical Milankovich cycles. Since the late 1970s, the Milankovich theory has remained the predominant theory to account for Ice Age causation among climate scientists, and hence the Milankovich theory is always described in textbooks of climatology and in encyclopaedia articles about the Ice Ages.
In their 1976 paper Imbrie, Hays, and Shackleton wrote that their own climate forecasts, which were based on sea-sediment cores and the Milankovich cycles, “… must be qualified in two ways. First, they apply only to the natural component of future climatic trends – and not to anthropogenic effects such as those due to the burning of fossil fuels. Second, they describe only the long-term trends, because they are linked to orbital variations with periods of 20,000 years and longer. Climatic oscillations at higher frequencies are not predicted… the results indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate.”
During the 1970s the famous American astronomer Carl Sagan and other scientists began promoting the theory that ‘greenhouse gasses’ such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, produced by human industries could lead to catastrophic global warming. Since the 1970s the theory of ‘anthropogenic global warming’ (AGW) has gradually become accepted as fact by most of the academic establishment, and their acceptance of AGW has inspired a global movement to encourage governments to make pivotal changes to prevent the worsening of AGW.
The central piece of evidence that is cited in support of the AGW theory is the famous ‘hockey stick’ graph which was presented by Al Gore in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” The ‘hockey stick’ graph shows an acute upward spike in global temperatures which began during the 1970s and continued through the winter of 2006/07. However, this warming trend was interrupted when the winter of 2007/8 delivered the deepest snow cover to the Northern Hemisphere since 1966 and the coldest temperatures since 2001. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures.
The main flaw in the AGW theory is that its proponents focus on evidence from only the past one thousand years at most, while ignoring the evidence from the past million years — evidence which is essential for a true understanding of climatology. The data from paleoclimatology provides us with an alternative and more credible explanation for the recent global temperature spike, based on the natural cycle of Ice Age maximums and interglacials.
In 1999 the British journal “Nature” published the results of data derived from glacial ice cores collected at the Russia’s Vostok station in Antarctica during the 1990s. The Vostok ice core data includes a record of global atmospheric temperatures, atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and airborne particulates starting from 420,000 years ago and continuing through history up to our present time.
The graph of the Vostok ice core data shows that the Ice Age maximums and the warm interglacials occur within a regular cyclic pattern, the graph-line of which is similar to the rhythm of a heartbeat on an electrocardiogram tracing. The Vostok data graph also shows that changes in global CO2 levels lag behind global temperature changes by about eight hundred years. What that indicates is that global temperatures precede or cause global CO2 changes, and not the reverse. In other words, increasing atmospheric CO2 is not causing global temperature to rise; instead the natural cyclic increase in global temperature is causing global CO2 to rise.
The reason that global CO2 levels rise and fall in response to the global temperature is because cold water is capable of retaining more CO2 than warm water. That is why carbonated beverages loose their carbonation, or CO2, when stored in a warm environment. We store our carbonated soft drinks, wine, and beer in a cool place to prevent them from loosing their ‘fizz’, which is a feature of their carbonation, or CO2 content. The earth is currently warming as a result of the natural Ice Age cycle, and as the oceans get warmer, they release increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Because the release of CO2 by the warming oceans lags behind the changes in the earth’s temperature, we should expect to see global CO2 levels continue to rise for another eight hundred years after the end of the earth’s current Interglacial warm period. We should already be eight hundred years into the coming Ice Age before global CO2 levels begin to drop in response to the increased chilling of the world’s oceans.
The Vostok ice core data graph reveals that global CO2 levels regularly rose and fell in a direct response to the natural cycle of Ice Age minimums and maximums during the past four hundred and twenty thousand years. Within that natural cycle, about every 110,000 years global temperatures, followed by global CO2 levels, have peaked at approximately the same levels which they are at today.
About 325,000 years ago, at the peak of a warm interglacial, global temperature and CO2 levels were higher than they are today. Today we are again at the peak, and near to the end, of a warm interglacial, and the earth is now due to enter the next Ice Age. If we are lucky, we may have a few years to prepare for it. The Ice Age will return, as it always has, in its regular and natural cycle, with or without any influence from the effects of AGW.
The AGW theory is based on data that is drawn from a ridiculously narrow span of time and it demonstrates a wanton disregard for the ‘big picture’ of long-term climate change. The data from paleoclimatology, including ice cores, sea sediments, geology, paleobotany and zoology, indicate that we are on the verge of entering another Ice Age, and the data also shows that severe and lasting climate change can occur within only a few years. While concern over the dubious threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming continues to distract the attention of people throughout the world, the very real threat of the approaching and inevitable Ice Age, which will render large parts of the Northern Hemisphere uninhabitable, is being foolishly ignored.
Non c’e’ bisogno di essere d’accordo in toto con i promotori originali del Global Population Speak Out (vedi sotto) per capire che l’argomento della (possibile? reale? impossibile?) sovrappopolazione umana va comunque tenuto presente
BENVENUTI AL GLOBAL POPULATION SPEAK OUT (GPSO)
(FAR CONOSCERE IL PROBLEMA DELLA POPOLAZIONE GLOBALE )
Il GPSO (http://gpso.wordpress.com/ è stato ideato dal giornalista e scrittore americano John Fenney, come semplice risposta al dramma ecologico globale, rappresentato dall’espansione della popolazione umana, attraverso il suo ruolo prominente nelle crisi che stiamo affrontando.
Purtroppo un tabu’ da parte di tutte le forze politiche impedisce un’aperta discussione pubblica di questo problema, al di fuori della comunità scientifica.
Un gruppo di prominenti personalità del mondo della scienza e dell’ecologia si è formato allo scopo d’ aprire un onesto dibattito su questo tema, che ripudi abusi e distorsioni di ogni tipo, ma che rispetti i diritti umani , tra i quali preminente il collasso ecologico dovuto a pressioni umane sull’ambiente che ci sostiene.(v.Nota)
Il Progetto è fondato su una semplice idea:
invitare un gran numero di qualificati personaggi da tutto il mondo ad esprimersi pubblicamente e allo stesso tempo sul problema della popolazione . Il potere del numero puo’ aiutare a indebolire il tabu’ e finalmente diffondere la conoscenza generale del problema.
Per questa ragione, abbiamo inviato una lettera a un grande numero di scienziati, sociologhi, ambientalisti, editori, giornalisti, amministratori, politici e altre personalità pubbliche , chiedendo loro di menzionare i pericoli della sovrappopolazione durante il mese di febbraio 2009, nella maniera da loro scelta.
Al momento, il GPSO ha ricevuto l’adesione da oltre 17 paesi, che hanno scelto di esternare il pericolo della sovrappopolazione durante il mese di febbraio , alcuni attraverso pubblicazioni e giornali, altri attraverso interviste, conferenze pubbliche e TV.
Tra i partecipanti /promotori del progetto elenchiamo gli scienziati Paul e Anne Ehrlich della Stanford University, l’ecologo David Pimentel della Cornell University e Dennis Meadow, coautore del “Limits to Growth*.
LETTERA APERTA A POTENZIALI PARTECIPANTI AL GPSO:
“Cari Amici e Colleghi,
Vi invitiamo a partecipare al Global Population Speak Out (GPSO). E’ una semplice idea che risponde al bisogno di affrontare una grande sfida globale. Voi siete parte di un gruppo di voci importanti che possono cambiare le coscienze e la politica.
La nostra situazione ecologica continua a degenerare. Un recente Rapporto del WWF suggerisce che nell’attuale scenario di Business-as-usual, l’esauremento delle risorse e degli ecosistemi porterà al sicuro collasso.
Molti infatti sono d’accordo nell’indicare l’imminente overshoot della capacità del pianeta di sostenerci e che il progresso della Sesta Estinzione di Massa insieme a una quantità di correlati severi problemi globali è una minaccia per la sussistenza umana e delle altre specie.
Manca la copertura mediatica
La copertura mediatica manca. In particolare, non viene riportato il legame fondamentale tra il numero e la crescita della popolazione umana e il conseguente degrado ecologico.
Non è di conforto sapere che ultimamente il tasso globale di crescita si sta riducendo: l’assoluto numero insieme alla dimensione delle nostre attività sorpassano già i limiti della Terra.
E’ necessario agire e il cambiamento non avviene senza mettere il soggetto della popolazione al centro di ogni pubblica discussione .
Non sorprende che il problema della populazione non venga discusso. I media sono in maggioranza in favore della crescita economica e servono gruppi di potere che hanno interesse a spingere per una continua crescita.
Il potere sta nel numero
Cosa succede se un gran numero di persone influenti , alcune delle quali non hanno menzionato in tempo tale problema ,lo menzionassero allo stesso tempo ?
Gli oppositori non potrebero refutare tutti !
Un coro unificato farà leva sull’azione per abbattere la barriera che impedisce la discussione pubblica sul soggetto e servirebbe a ispirare nuove idee e programmi .
Con queste premesse, vi sollecitiamo ad unirvi alle voci che hanno già aderito al GPSO.
Vi invitiamo a impegnarvi , durante il mese di Febbraio 2009, a diffondere pubblicamente nella maniera da voi scelta . il problema della sovrappopolazione.
Come vi rivolgerete al pubblico ? Cio’ dipende dalle vostre risorse e preferenze.
Scrivere a editori di giornali e pubblicazioni specializzate, contattare una radio o TV per un’intervista, lanciare una conferenza stampa. Ci affidiamo alla vostra creatività, considerando il migliore metodo per raggiungere la massima pubblicità e influenzare il maggiore numero di persone.
ABBIAMO BISOGNO DI DUE SEMPLICI RISPOSTE :
1. Per aderire, rispondere a questa email con la semplice risposta: Aderisco.
La vostra adesione verrà aggiunta a quella degli altri partecipanti.
2. Quando voi vi impegnrete, vi preghiamo di inviare un link, descrizione o altra indicazione di cio’ che avte fatto, insieme al vostro nome e titolo.
Noi aggiungeremo queste informazioni per creare una pagina che documenti i risultati del gruppo.
Email : GlobalPopulationSpeakOut@gmail.com
Nota. Un’opposizione storica alla pubblica discussione sulla popolazione è nata da rapporti ( negli anni ’70) di abusi di diritti umani , sofferti da popolazioni in nome del “controllo delle nascite”, come sterilizzazioni forzate.
23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked?
24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it?
25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” […]
32 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?” He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”
Esponenti del mondo politico, dell’associazionismo e della società civile dicono NO al tentativo posto in essere dall’On. Barani con la proposta di istituire l’Ordine del Tricolore, in base al quale coloro che ne saranno insigniti godranno di un vitalizio simbolico:l’accesso alla detta onorificenza sarà previsto per coloro che hanno prestato servizio nelle forze partigiane, per gli internati nei campi di concentramento e di prigionia, per gli appartenenti alle Forze Armate durante la guerra negli anni 1940-45 e per coloro che hanno combattuto nelle file della repubblica sociale nel biennio 1943-45.
Siamo di fronte ad un atto grave di oltraggio, non solo nei confronti dei valori costituzionali nati dall’antifascismo, ma anche nei confronti di tutti coloro che hanno combattuto, talvolta sono morti, per la libertà e la democrazia di questo Paese.
Equiparare chi si è opposto ad un regime e chi, invece, lo ha appoggiato è ingiusto per entrambe le parti oltre che pretestuoso.
E’ ugualmente pretestuoso il richiamo ad una presunta pacificazione nazionale che vuole cancellare la storia, fare come se nulla fosse stato: gli ex combattenti della Repubblica sociale, vigente la Costituzione repubblicana, hanno avuto il diritto di poter svolgere la loro vita liberamente, anche partecipando alla vita politica, esprimendo le loro idee, come garantito da quei principi ispiratori della vita democratica per cui sono morti coloro contro cui avevano combattuto durante la Liberazione. Questa è la manifestazione di una convivenza più pacifica possibile senza bisogno di riscrivere la storia, ordinando dall’alto di rimarginare ferite, forse, ancora aperte.
Le decorazioni al valore di cui sono insignite sia la Provincia di Massa Carrara che il Comune di Villafranca in Lunigiana, sono bagnate del sangue di chi ha resistito: quel sangue, ancora oggi, non può essere stato versato invano.
Chiara Guastalli, Valentina Guerrini, Fabrizio Finali e Remo Pratici dell’Anpi Villafranca-Bagnone
Mara Cavalli e Danilo Amadei consiglieri comunali del gruppo Villafranca Nostra
Gruppo Consiliare PD del Comune di Villafranca Lunigiana
Associazione Culturale Tina Modotti
Circolo Arci Torrano
Arci Provinciale zona Carrara Lunigiana
How many times have we been told that the consequence of an increase in CO2 concentration has to be an increase in temperature because laboratory studies have incontrovertibly shown the “greenhouse” nature of CO2 (and other gases)?
And yet, the (negative) reply to those claims is very simple.
Everybody can incontrovertibly verify in their own kitchen that warmer air moves upwards, and colder air downwards. We can call that the “greenhouse” nature of height, to be translated in mathematical models whose runs will surely convince some climate scientists about the existence of sizzling mountaintop conditions.
Now just imagine going up the K2 or the Aconcagua with such a climatologist, endlessly referring to progressively cooler temperatures as “noise masking the overall warming trend”…
To anticipate the usual comments: the above cannot be used to disprove the greenhouse effect of CO2 in the atmosphere. But it shows that such an effect has to be proven in the real world, rather than on paper simply by reference to what is found in laboratories and using theoretical physics.
Schizochronia (skĭt’sə-krŏnē-ə): from the Ancient Greek schizein (σχίζειν, “to split”) and chronos (χρόνος, “time”)
Any of a group of scientific communication disorders usually characterized by confounding the reality of what happens in the present day with the possibility of what may happen decades in the future. Schizochronia is associated with catastrophist thinking and may have an underlying political cause.
Is Anthropogenic Global Warming or Climate Change happening? The answer to that, many people believe it to be yes. There’s even a scientific consensus stating the same.
Has Anthropogenic Global Warming or Climate Change already happened? The answer to that, many people believe it to be yes. Trouble is, there’s no scientific consensus stating the same. In truth, according to the scientific consensus around AGW and CC, they cannot have happened as yet.
What we have witnessed in the past few years instead, has been a rush to “discover” evidence for AGW and CC in today’s world. Lots of “smoking guns” and plenty of “wake-up calls”, appropriately trite expressions to accompany for evidence that quite simply cannot be there…unless the scientific consensus on AGW is very, very wrong.
Invariably, smoking guns have been revealed empty, and wake-up calls mute. There is nothing to show for AGW and CC, as I find myself repeating. Cue this blog, Watt’s, Climate Audit and countless others. Cue the amount of skepticism in practical circles such as among engineers and meteorologists.
Now, why is the simple point not more forcefully explained by leading AGW proponents: that the science refers to what might happen later this century, and that the search for current signs of impending future catastrophes is to the edge of pointless?
One may be forgiven to think that the issue is being polluted by advocacy, as the revelation of absence of evidence could pretty much kill all present political efforts in matters of climate. But if this schizochronia between claims about the present and science about the future has been useful so far, obviously it has to be continuously fed, and the more so as the years go by, like a biding of time until something truly tangible finally surfaces.
(da un’idea di Domenico Malara) – L’11 gennaio 2009 la musica italiana ricorda il grande Fabrizio De Andrè a dieci anni dalla sua scomparsa. Tra le 22.40 e le 22.50, un centinaio di radio italiane trasmetteranno, in contemporanea con lo speciale “Che tempo che fa” di Raitre dal titolo “Fabrizio 2009″, Amore che vieni amore che vai, la canzone scelta da Dori Ghezzi come simbolo di questo ricordo via etere.
Di seguito il codice da usare in WordPress per partecipare al “Tributo a Fabrizio De Andrè a blog unificati” il giorno 11 Gennaio 2009. Puo’ essere facilmente adattato ad altre piattaforme per scrivere blog, ma non l’ho provato altrove.
(NB: bisogna eliminare lo spazio bianco fra “[” e “youtube” naturalmente)
<strong><a href=”http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=42060194206″ target=”_blank”>Tributo a Fabrizio De Andrè a blog unificati</a></strong>
<a href=”http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=42060194206″><img class=”alignleft” title=”11.1.1999-11.1.2009″ src=”http://photos-h.ll.facebook.com/photos-ll-snc1/v1937/52/29/1523807824/n1523807824_140575_7185.jpg” alt=”” width=”120″ height=”240″ /></a><em>(da un’idea di <a href=”http://malarablog.wordpress.com” target=”_blank”>Domenico Malara</a>)</em> – L’11 gennaio 2009 la musica italiana ricorda il grande Fabrizio De Andrè a dieci anni dalla sua scomparsa. Tra le 22.40 e le 22.50, un centinaio di radio italiane trasmetteranno, in contemporanea con lo speciale “Che tempo che fa” di Raitre dal titolo “Fabrizio 2009″, Amore che vieni amore che vai, la canzone scelta da Dori Ghezzi come simbolo di questo ricordo via etere.
L’idea è di rilanciare questa iniziativa anche sul web. Chiunque abbia un sito o un blog, quel giorno dedichi un post al grande Faber, pubblicando <a href=”http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=w7u_j9vRwm8″ target=”_blank”>il video di “Amore che vieni, amore che vai” reperibile da Yotube</a>.
Questo, al momento, l’elenco dei blog che pubblicheranno un post su Faber De Andrè e il video “Amore che vieni, amore che vai”:
(libera traduzione dall’originale “Here Comes The Flood” di Peter Gabriel, una canzone che straordinariamente sembra descrivere perfettamente il maremoto che distrusse Messina e Reggio Calabria il 28 dicembre 1908 )
Ecco, arriva la marea
Quando arriva la notte
I disturbi crescono
Fra le onde radio
E tante altre cose strane
Accadono, come preavvisi del futuro prossimo
Poi ecco le stelle del mare senza piu’ rifugio
Immobili attendono, la marea
Noi, non abbiamo piu’ direzione,
ne’ possiamo scegliere da che parte stare
Percorrevo il vecchio sentiero
Vuoto sul bordo, nel vuoto delle acque
Sulle colline intorno
Stavano diventando grandi, bambini e bambine
Quando da sotto il mondo di pietra e’ venuto in su’
Con onde di metallo scaraventate verso il cielo
E mentre i chiodi si conficcavano nelle nubi, la pioggia
Era calda, e inzuppava gia’ la gente
Ecco, arriva la marea
Diciamo addio alla nostra carne, e alle nostre ossa
Se poi i mari torneranno al silenzio
Di fronte a qualcuno ancora vivo
Sopravviveranno quelli con la loro isola
Bevete pure, voi che ancora sognate. Fra poco tornera’ l’asciutto
Quando e’ il momento della marea
Non hai piu’ casa, non hai piu’ mura
Nel fragore di tuono
Ci sono mille anime, in un lampo
Non aver paura di piangere a cio’ che vedi
Tutti sono andati via, ci siamo solo noi
E se poi ci perdiamo prima dell’alba, costruiranno
Su quel che resta di noi
Ecco, arriva la marea
Diciamo addio alla nostra carne, e alle nostre ossa
Se poi i mari torneranno al silenzio
Di fronte a qualcuno ancora vivo
Sopravviveranno quelli con la loro isola
Bevete pure, voi che ancora sognate. Fra poco tornera’ l’asciutto
Although HuffPost welcomes a vigorous debate on many subjects, I am a firm believer that there are not two sides to every issue, and that on some issues the jury is no longer out. The climate crisis is one of these issues.
David Brooks’s analysis (“The confidence war,” Views, Dec. 7) is missing the fact that the very strategies of successive Israeli governments, the Palestinian Authority and now Hamas have been based on the utter disregard of the value of the lives of individual Palestinians.
This has been true especially in the last decade or so. One side casually bombs crowded residential areas from afar only to release increasingly hypocritical apologetic press releases afterward. The other side sends youths on suicide missions or unleashes them armed with stones to throw at armored tanks – while proclaiming that thousands and thousands of dead women and children are a price worth paying for victory against “the Zionists.”
As shown repeatedly during the last century, it should be the job of international institutions to push hard for the safeguarding of lives, especially when the local governments are clearly unable or unwilling to do so. But I am afraid that with the way things are going, we can only expect a future made of innumerable deaths.
I’ll expand briefly upon that to argue why Israel is not the actual problem for the Palestinians, at the moment.
True, most of the actions undertaken during the latest conflict situation by the Jerusalem Government are at the edge or beyond the very limits of International Law and War Law. It also does look especially fishy how the Gaza invasion coincides with upcoming Israeli elections…one of the luckily few occasions where a democracy makes liberal use of somebody else’s blood for a few votes more.
But that’s less important to Palestinians than the gigantic failure of their leadership(s) to do anything positive on their behalf.
Like it or not, when there is a war one side usually shows little interest in protecting the other side’s civilian lives (it depends on the war, and on the propaganda, but the overall trend is alas towards more civilian deaths). However deplorable, if Azerbaijan declares war against Armenia (just an example) it goes without saying that Azerbaijanis will rather kill Armenians, and Armenians Azerbaijanis.
Usually, that is accompanied by each side trying as much as possible to protect its own: therefore Azerbaijan will do its best to defend Azerbaijanis, and Armenia Armenians. Sometimes that doesn’t actually work out as proclaimed (see Russian botched kidnap rescue attempts) but one can assume that at least the intention is always there.
That is not what happens for Palestinians. They must be the only people on Earth deliberately put in harm’s way by their own leaders. I am sure that even the incredibly locked-up Burmese junta, and the paranoid hermit North Korean state-wide prison, would try to lower casualties among their own citizens in case of war much, much better than Hamas (or Fatah for that matters) have ever managed even to imagine, let alone do.
In fact, just like in Communist states of old (USSR famine in the 1930’s, China famine in the 1950’s), in the world as seen by Hamas people are not people, but pawns to use for a higher ideological purpose (namely, the destruction of Israel). Horribly, a dead Palestinian child becomes more useful to them than a live Palestinian child, as it does make Israel look an abominable entity that doesn’t deserve to seat among Nations.
Whatever Israel has done or is doing, things don’t have to be the way they are. Resistance is a natural reaction to occupation, but suicide (or worse: making sure some of yours get killed for your political advantage) is not.
As suggested in the blog and the letter to the IHT, we would go a long way towards improving the Palestinians’ situation if only we could protect the people from Hamas (and from Fatah).
Now of course one would have to understand what brought Palestinians in the Occupied Territories to a situation that is perhaps worse than Somalia’s and definitely makes Haiti looks like Heaven on Earth. One would not do wrong by considering the issue of politicide by Israel, but that is as relevant to today’s situation as reconsidering the opportunity of wearing warm clothes in a snowstorm is to somebody that has already caught pneumonia.
Anthropogenic Global Warming / Climate Change per se are _not_ self-evident facts of the moment. Whoever claims otherwise, they are perpetuating the Big Lie of AGW.
Theirs is not Science, but a falsification of it.
The debate that should be going on at the moment, and the point around which decisions should be made, is on the possibility that for some reason, we today are seeding the seeds of AGW in the future.
But that issue is very much cloudied by hysterical, anti-scientific reports and claims about present-day AGW. And that risks to impede the discovery and implementation of proper responses to the AGW threat, rather than patched-up farces such as the Kyoto Protocol.
Tough love indeed some environmentalists have for the environment. A few more cries purportedly to defend it, and they may as well kill it themselves altogether.
E allura, Calabrisi ppi Calabrisi, sperandu chi ‘dda bona donna ‘i Dianne Feinstein nun faci ‘na camurrìa ppi tta confirmescion, pozzu dirti cacchi cosa puru ieu?
(1) ‘A CIA e’ sicuramenti cchina ‘i surici chi vogghiunu sulamenti vidirti fallire. Statti attentu. ‘U megghiuri metudu e’ cangiari chianu chianu tutti i capi cchiu’ ‘mportanti, e solu dopu fari ‘a rivoluzione (ppi esempiu, pinsandu ‘a nu pocu i moralita’, dopu tutta ‘dda tortura)
(2) ‘Natra cosa chi dovristi cangiari e’ ‘a struttura da’ sicurezza ‘mmericana. FBI, CIA, NSA e adessu puru Homeland Security, chista e’ ‘a ricetta sulamenti ppi ‘nna lutta ‘ntestina sinza fini.
(3) ‘Nun sacciu si ttu voj ristari ‘a CIA moltu tempu. Ma si ttu voj, ricurdati chi si Obama voli leggiri ‘na cosa, ma ‘a CIA scuprìu ‘natra, tu haj ‘a purtargli prima cchiddu ch’iddu voli. Ma poi parra cu iddu ppi spiegari bbeni ‘i cosi comu stannu. Almenu ‘nna vota, circa ‘i mustchari chi almenu unu teni ‘a ‘ntelligence, ‘nta Central Intelligence Agency.
(d) Anfini, quattchu dumandi chi ssi tu rispundi, pozzunu trasfurmarti in Eroe ppi seculi ddi seculi…ccu fu veramente ‘a ‘mmazzari ‘i ‘ddu frati Kennedy? E Martin Luther King? E aund’esti ‘u corpu ‘i Jimmy Hoffa?
I am not saying that I disagree (and I don’t) with David Brooks’ definition of how to find a meaning in each Israeli-Palestinian act of terrorism or war (“The confidence war“, IHT, January 7, 2009). But what is missing from Mr Brooks’ analysis is the fact that the very strategies of successive Israeli Governments, the PLO and now Hamas have been based on the utter disregard of the value of the lives of individual Palestinians.
This has been true especially in the last decade or so, with one side casually bombing crowded residential areas from afar only to release increasingly hypocritical “sorry” press releases afterwards; and the other either sending youths to suicide missions or armed with stones against armored tanks, or proclaiming without a second thought that thousands and thousands of dead women and children are a price worth paying for victory against “the Zionists”.
As shown repeatedly during the last century, it should be the job of international institutions to push hard for the safeguarding of lives, especially when the local Government is clearly unable or unwilling to do so. But I am afraid that until negotiations get centered around politicking rather than the basic rights of individual human beings, Palestinians (and Somalis, and Darfuris, etc etc) can only expect a future made of innumerable deaths.