We have all been alerted to the presence of dangerous chemicals which are added to prescription drugs, foods, homes, and even, currently, sporting events. Curiously, one of the greater killers, world wide has been largely ignored. Yes, dihydrogen monoxide (DMHO) accounts for tens of thousands of deaths on the planet annually. Exposure to massive amounts or a little as a few ounces can have a fatal affect.
This pollutant has a global scope and is present in every river, stream, lake and sea. Among the common uses of DMHO are distribution of pesticides, nuclear power plants, commercial solvents, coolants, Styrofoam production, food processing, alcoholic beverage manufacturing and as additives for “junk food.”
In its gaseous form, it can result in severe skin damage and even death. In a solid state, it is the cause of countless, heart attacks, strokes, fractured bones and even occasional blinding. Our government, despite the dangers, continues to allow work with DMHO in many agencies and even provides gigantic storage facilities for its containment. Some observers report that it is even prevalent in our schools and have seen students ingesting it on the premises.
Many apologists claim that the beneficial effects far outweigh the negatives in the use of DMHO but that hardly minimizes the dangers. As a factor in weather disturbances, it knows no peer. Many scientists and government agencies place most of the blame for the tragic happenings in New Orleans squarely on the failure to control DMHO. Like many dangerous chemical compounds, it has a special allure—even a mystique—for many and especially the youth of our country.
Others have suggested an outright ban on DMHO but I disagree. I feel that intelligent use can result in reaping the benefits without enduring the results of the dangers. Like so many chemical ssubstances we need to temper our usage.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Friday, March 14, 2008
A “Bear”able view
Another “true believer” has bitten the dust. Miklós Zágoni, one of the foremost exponents of global warming alarmism and a former high apostle of that infamous religion has crunched some numbers and decided to take an exact opposite position. His new found apostasy stems from false conclusions drawn about the extent of the height and affects in the earth’s atmosphere.
Apparently, erroneous findings were developed by relying upon the mistaken notions of Arthur Milne in 1922 as to boundary limitations in the upper atmosphere. He observed that scientific findings in more recent years—mainly achieved by Ferenc Miskolczi—have produced a far different result in computing those limits. It was this that led him to resign from NASA and rethink his entire outlook since they were reluctant to give up ninety-year-old science. His principal argument was with a team of scientists who refused to rely upon pure scientific method in reaching conclusions. It was the old “cart before the horse” thing. They wanted to draw conclusions and then do research to support them. Being old fashioned, he wanted to do the research first and then air the result.
He asserts—probably correctly—that their motivation is, and has been, money. Big surprise; funding for the program has reached $5,000,000,000.00 and it can no longer be defined as a cottage industry. I would imagine that a budget of that magnitude would encourage following the instructions of the leadership.
If you would care to follow along with the math used to achieve this diametric attitude, the following file (in pdf format, Adobe) covering his revised formulations is furnished. Get out your pencil and an old envelope and check him out . . . . .
Now that you have had a chance to verify for yourself what he asserts, I’m certain that you’ll agree. Now let’s turn to yet one more myth being offered by the hysterics of the Church of Global Warming.
At the center of this controversy is the polar bear. Let us first establish that the population of these critters was established in 1970 at 5,000. In 2007, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, working in concert with Canadian and Russian agencies, set the census of these bears in excess of 25,000 world wide. Even if you didn’t do the math in the illustration above, I’m sure you can recognize the 500% increase of the population in the thirty-eight year span. Given these numbers, one questions the decision of the USF&WS to declare them an endangered species. They themselves admit that the growth of the numbers is robust. In spite of recent reports of increase in the pack ice and seal population which is ideal for their sustenance, they accept the lunacy of the computer models and assert they are subject to the vagaries of increasing temperatures in the arctic regions. No acknowledgment is given to their superb adaptive characteristics and abilities to conform to that which is, and not to that which the scientific community considers ideal. Further, make no mistake in assessing the motives of the global warming hysterics and the environmental tree huggers. Their stated goals may vary but the driving force is the disruption of the capitalist economy.
Since I don’t hunt polar bears, the personal affect will be minimal. However, the indigenous peoples do, and consider them important for income, clothing and food. Sport hunters pay up to $25,000 for the chance to bag one and the locals encourage them to try. Being designated a protected species would bring that boon to an end.
You may recall I drove to the Arctic Ocean about two years ago to see for myself what the situation was in the oil patch at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. I especially wanted to observe the affects that the pipeline and drilling were having on the environment and the native game population. I saw little evidence of man’s footprint in that unbelievably vast expanse. The “enviro-nuts” were devastated by the Porcupine herd of Caribou, who much preferred the comforts surrounding the oil pipe line to life on the muskeg. Altogether there was wildlife in abundance including birds of every stripe. The greatest blessing on the trip was the absence of people. In the three hundred miles of the Dalton Highway (the only road in the US) north of the Arctic Circle, there are two gas stations and two motels. One drives the gravel road for dozens of miles without seeing other traffic. Don’t even ask about restrooms.
I read one very interesting quote in USA Today which said: “Over the possibly 200,000 years the polar bear has existed as a species. It survived ‘very harsh conditions’ of extreme cold, and warmth, such as the last interglacial period, 100,000 to 110,000 years ago.” That was Willie Soon, an astrophysicist with the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. I did confirm that it is indeed an extremely harsh environment, not desirable for man but well equipped by God for the beasts.
Why then would the USF&WS be urged to designate this bear an endangered species? It is very simple. It would, for the first time, identify the main threat to a species as global warming. This lends credence to all the other programs and assertions. Otherwise this healthy species is in absolutely no peril whatsoever. Armed with this outrageous precedent, the faithful of the new religion could further their insidious designs into vast other areas. Use of the statutes is nothing new to inhibit or at least hinder growth and development but it has been largely local. Can you say snail darter and spotted owl? The implication of this use in this manner makes it an issue of international importance.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Apparently, erroneous findings were developed by relying upon the mistaken notions of Arthur Milne in 1922 as to boundary limitations in the upper atmosphere. He observed that scientific findings in more recent years—mainly achieved by Ferenc Miskolczi—have produced a far different result in computing those limits. It was this that led him to resign from NASA and rethink his entire outlook since they were reluctant to give up ninety-year-old science. His principal argument was with a team of scientists who refused to rely upon pure scientific method in reaching conclusions. It was the old “cart before the horse” thing. They wanted to draw conclusions and then do research to support them. Being old fashioned, he wanted to do the research first and then air the result.
He asserts—probably correctly—that their motivation is, and has been, money. Big surprise; funding for the program has reached $5,000,000,000.00 and it can no longer be defined as a cottage industry. I would imagine that a budget of that magnitude would encourage following the instructions of the leadership.
If you would care to follow along with the math used to achieve this diametric attitude, the following file (in pdf format, Adobe) covering his revised formulations is furnished. Get out your pencil and an old envelope and check him out . . . . .
Now that you have had a chance to verify for yourself what he asserts, I’m certain that you’ll agree. Now let’s turn to yet one more myth being offered by the hysterics of the Church of Global Warming.
At the center of this controversy is the polar bear. Let us first establish that the population of these critters was established in 1970 at 5,000. In 2007, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, working in concert with Canadian and Russian agencies, set the census of these bears in excess of 25,000 world wide. Even if you didn’t do the math in the illustration above, I’m sure you can recognize the 500% increase of the population in the thirty-eight year span. Given these numbers, one questions the decision of the USF&WS to declare them an endangered species. They themselves admit that the growth of the numbers is robust. In spite of recent reports of increase in the pack ice and seal population which is ideal for their sustenance, they accept the lunacy of the computer models and assert they are subject to the vagaries of increasing temperatures in the arctic regions. No acknowledgment is given to their superb adaptive characteristics and abilities to conform to that which is, and not to that which the scientific community considers ideal. Further, make no mistake in assessing the motives of the global warming hysterics and the environmental tree huggers. Their stated goals may vary but the driving force is the disruption of the capitalist economy.
Since I don’t hunt polar bears, the personal affect will be minimal. However, the indigenous peoples do, and consider them important for income, clothing and food. Sport hunters pay up to $25,000 for the chance to bag one and the locals encourage them to try. Being designated a protected species would bring that boon to an end.
You may recall I drove to the Arctic Ocean about two years ago to see for myself what the situation was in the oil patch at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. I especially wanted to observe the affects that the pipeline and drilling were having on the environment and the native game population. I saw little evidence of man’s footprint in that unbelievably vast expanse. The “enviro-nuts” were devastated by the Porcupine herd of Caribou, who much preferred the comforts surrounding the oil pipe line to life on the muskeg. Altogether there was wildlife in abundance including birds of every stripe. The greatest blessing on the trip was the absence of people. In the three hundred miles of the Dalton Highway (the only road in the US) north of the Arctic Circle, there are two gas stations and two motels. One drives the gravel road for dozens of miles without seeing other traffic. Don’t even ask about restrooms.
I read one very interesting quote in USA Today which said: “Over the possibly 200,000 years the polar bear has existed as a species. It survived ‘very harsh conditions’ of extreme cold, and warmth, such as the last interglacial period, 100,000 to 110,000 years ago.” That was Willie Soon, an astrophysicist with the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. I did confirm that it is indeed an extremely harsh environment, not desirable for man but well equipped by God for the beasts.
Why then would the USF&WS be urged to designate this bear an endangered species? It is very simple. It would, for the first time, identify the main threat to a species as global warming. This lends credence to all the other programs and assertions. Otherwise this healthy species is in absolutely no peril whatsoever. Armed with this outrageous precedent, the faithful of the new religion could further their insidious designs into vast other areas. Use of the statutes is nothing new to inhibit or at least hinder growth and development but it has been largely local. Can you say snail darter and spotted owl? The implication of this use in this manner makes it an issue of international importance.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Music: Take It From The Top!
Is it not amazing that some folks (me?) can be surrounded with truth and not recognize it? I mentioned in closing the Rant last Monday that I was uncomfortable with some of the participatory music in congregations I had been visiting recently. I had carelessly attributed the cause to a number of possibilities: youth attraction (guitars and drums,) simplicity for the masses, mindless repetition as a teaching tool or just a harmless trend.
Thinking more critically, I realize that the situation is more a sea change in the direction of the faithful. I have come to believe that it is a result of universal trend toward “top down” organizational structure within religious bodies. My earliest observations and awareness came from watching the Catholics fifty-sixty years ago. At that time, they rarely emphasized or encouraged independent bible study. Singing actual hymns was rare if not totally absent. I interpreted their services as being priest centered with little contribution from the worshippers other than altar boys. The service was more observation than participation. Happily for them, congregational involvement has escalated over the decades and represents a positive move for their members toward understanding Christ and the vital functions of His church.
The protestant bodies I have observed recently have proven a mix of attitudes. Lay members seem encouraged to participate from the pews and the lectern. Universally, they handle the announcements, are called on for prayer, read scriptures and perform other functions formerly reserved for the pastor. His primary role would appear to be the delivery of the sermon. In all cases I have seen, he has done a masterful job of presenting the case for Christ and the resultant benefits for the assembly. The rub comes when music is the issue.
The various pieces are projected upon a screen with only the lyrics shown with no accompanying music. The locals seem to know the tune but rarely present it with any vigor or understanding of the message. Perhaps as a result of advancing age, my hearing has difficulty picking up the voices over the cacophony of back up singers, guitars, drums, organ, and piano/keyboard. As I look about I see no real enthusiasm in the congregations for what is being sung but rather detached boredom by the repetition of pappy phrases. It really sums up to participation rather than praise.
I may be more sensitive to this than the average bear. My Lord has given me a shade more musical understanding than average and I truly thank Him for the gift. I sing nearly all hymns in bass and thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to supply the emphasis of the contrapuntal melody in that part so common in Restoration hymns. The pew behind the one I usually take is occupied by two ladies, one a capable soprano and the other with a strong rich alto, and we form the core constituency of a soprano-alto-bass choir. It offers to the balance of the congregation opportunity for a full-throated enjoyment of honoring the Master in song by following our lead.. Thus, the congregation becomes a choir in toto. This participation allows each member to be an active participant in the service and offer his voice to God.
After due consideration I have concluded that the former Catholic model and the current Protestant situation is a result of a tendency toward “top down” worship – in music at least. Aside from responsive readings which one rarely hears outside the Methodist Church, the only other activity that is universal is hymn singing. While we all participate in prayer, it is normally offered by one individual. Even taking the sacrament, limited to "believers" focuses on the singular relationship between each person and his very personal covenant with God. Putting aside my objection to the “new age” aspects of the lyrics, I decry the missed occasion for even the most passive among us to share these joyous moments. Our scriptures command us to lift our collective voices in honor and praise. I cannot imagine that this injunction was raised for no reason.
Any removal of the everyday member from the activity of seeking God is suspect in my mind. I truly believe that even if you are tone deaf and constantly sing flat, your God and mine understands and rejoices in your effort. To discourage the body from this activity thwarts the clearly stated request from the Almighty to “join together” and worship Him. He has often stated His opinion in this regard even as He seeks respect for His duly ordained. There is much to be gained by thoughtful consideration of the teachers and preachers, but even the least have their responsibilities.
So, there you have it. Now go "lift your glad voices!”
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Thinking more critically, I realize that the situation is more a sea change in the direction of the faithful. I have come to believe that it is a result of universal trend toward “top down” organizational structure within religious bodies. My earliest observations and awareness came from watching the Catholics fifty-sixty years ago. At that time, they rarely emphasized or encouraged independent bible study. Singing actual hymns was rare if not totally absent. I interpreted their services as being priest centered with little contribution from the worshippers other than altar boys. The service was more observation than participation. Happily for them, congregational involvement has escalated over the decades and represents a positive move for their members toward understanding Christ and the vital functions of His church.
The protestant bodies I have observed recently have proven a mix of attitudes. Lay members seem encouraged to participate from the pews and the lectern. Universally, they handle the announcements, are called on for prayer, read scriptures and perform other functions formerly reserved for the pastor. His primary role would appear to be the delivery of the sermon. In all cases I have seen, he has done a masterful job of presenting the case for Christ and the resultant benefits for the assembly. The rub comes when music is the issue.
The various pieces are projected upon a screen with only the lyrics shown with no accompanying music. The locals seem to know the tune but rarely present it with any vigor or understanding of the message. Perhaps as a result of advancing age, my hearing has difficulty picking up the voices over the cacophony of back up singers, guitars, drums, organ, and piano/keyboard. As I look about I see no real enthusiasm in the congregations for what is being sung but rather detached boredom by the repetition of pappy phrases. It really sums up to participation rather than praise.
I may be more sensitive to this than the average bear. My Lord has given me a shade more musical understanding than average and I truly thank Him for the gift. I sing nearly all hymns in bass and thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to supply the emphasis of the contrapuntal melody in that part so common in Restoration hymns. The pew behind the one I usually take is occupied by two ladies, one a capable soprano and the other with a strong rich alto, and we form the core constituency of a soprano-alto-bass choir. It offers to the balance of the congregation opportunity for a full-throated enjoyment of honoring the Master in song by following our lead.. Thus, the congregation becomes a choir in toto. This participation allows each member to be an active participant in the service and offer his voice to God.
After due consideration I have concluded that the former Catholic model and the current Protestant situation is a result of a tendency toward “top down” worship – in music at least. Aside from responsive readings which one rarely hears outside the Methodist Church, the only other activity that is universal is hymn singing. While we all participate in prayer, it is normally offered by one individual. Even taking the sacrament, limited to "believers" focuses on the singular relationship between each person and his very personal covenant with God. Putting aside my objection to the “new age” aspects of the lyrics, I decry the missed occasion for even the most passive among us to share these joyous moments. Our scriptures command us to lift our collective voices in honor and praise. I cannot imagine that this injunction was raised for no reason.
Any removal of the everyday member from the activity of seeking God is suspect in my mind. I truly believe that even if you are tone deaf and constantly sing flat, your God and mine understands and rejoices in your effort. To discourage the body from this activity thwarts the clearly stated request from the Almighty to “join together” and worship Him. He has often stated His opinion in this regard even as He seeks respect for His duly ordained. There is much to be gained by thoughtful consideration of the teachers and preachers, but even the least have their responsibilities.
So, there you have it. Now go "lift your glad voices!”
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Just for Fun
While catching up on my amusement allocation the other night I came across an extremely interesting article from the Ladies Home Journal. To appreciate this post, it is essential that you click on the link and read the result.
I suppose it is natural to dream about the future. This trait is not the exclusive property of the denizens of the twenty first century. This issue of the Journal which provided the text was printed in 1899. In anticipation of the turn of the century they projected their concept of what the future held in several areas of interest.
Since they were not clairvoyant, it seemed unlikely they would come up with predictions of future technology as accurate as the article indicates. My personal opinion is that they did a remarkable job of foreseeing upcoming events and inventions. Thinking of the progress which we have made in the last ten years their anticipation of today’s reality are all the more remarkable.
Go ahead and click the link above and see what William McKinley’s constituents had on their mind as they tried to anticipate the future.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
I suppose it is natural to dream about the future. This trait is not the exclusive property of the denizens of the twenty first century. This issue of the Journal which provided the text was printed in 1899. In anticipation of the turn of the century they projected their concept of what the future held in several areas of interest.
Since they were not clairvoyant, it seemed unlikely they would come up with predictions of future technology as accurate as the article indicates. My personal opinion is that they did a remarkable job of foreseeing upcoming events and inventions. Thinking of the progress which we have made in the last ten years their anticipation of today’s reality are all the more remarkable.
Go ahead and click the link above and see what William McKinley’s constituents had on their mind as they tried to anticipate the future.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Transformative Accommodation
Wow, that’s a mouthful. If confused language in nine total syllables leaves you mystified then you must really be ready to fall for the latest from the academy or the clergy. The phrase came up in an address to a group of lawyers in England. This classic mumbo-jumbo was mouthed by no less than the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams. His eminence (?) offered this in defense of sharing the jurisprudence of the British courts with the emerging population of immigrants in deference to their particular beliefs. What it boils down to is best stated by legal theorist Ayelet Shachar saying: “Power holders are forced to compete for the loyalty of their shared constituents.”
The Archbishop was actually asserting that people should be able to choose those laws under which they live. That’s fine, but only until ones nation is overladen with recent immigrants who hold to an entirely different set of concepts from those of the indigenous peoples. In this case the newly arrived are largely Pakistani Muslims who assign no consideration of women and exert complete control over their lives ignoring any vestige of equal, much less, human rights. This package comes complete with honor killings, polygamy, arranged marriages, dress codes and a general demeaning and undue supervision of the fairer sex. How one accommodates these otherwise felonious activities into existing British law, I am not entirely certain. The Archbishop really didn’t explain that since he obviously thinks it a minor barrier.
One commenter remarked that Williams was a sterling example of “moral cowardice.” I could not agree more. His much lauded ability to speak eight separate languages apparently doesn’t guarantee him the right or the wit to understand any of them. I have known women who could “kill” you with a larger variety of looks, smirks, glances and leers than that and not utter a word. We are told he deserves deference for his erudite status as an academic theologian. Why? How could anyone with a scintilla of sense countenance restructuring a venerable and ancient legal code to mesh with the desires of a minority group of newcomers? Apparently all one needs to be is an “academic theologian” to deserve respect and to couch each ridiculous argument in unpronounceable words and meaningless phrases.
As a staunch proponent of liberty even I recognize that a certain number of rules are necessary for public order. Over the life of our republic, and certainly England as well, the representatives of the people have decided on many laws to insure tranquility. Some may seem unfair but they are still the law. To separate certain individuals as not subject to the law is not only unfair, it is unconscionable. If the populace, through representative governance, determines that aspects of Sharia Law should be the rule; then so be it. If not, then, learn to live with the laws as they stand.
I used to call upon a gnarly old coot in Lincoln, Nebraska who operated a furniture store and funeral parlor. In preliminary discussions of his customers needs he shared his appraisal of the world at large. Said he, “Son, there are only three kinds of people in this world: ignorant God d***** fools, educated God d***** fools, and religious God d***** fools.” It is my belief that the Archbishop of Canterbury has established that Mr. E.C. Korst of Lincoln is closest to the truth.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
The Archbishop was actually asserting that people should be able to choose those laws under which they live. That’s fine, but only until ones nation is overladen with recent immigrants who hold to an entirely different set of concepts from those of the indigenous peoples. In this case the newly arrived are largely Pakistani Muslims who assign no consideration of women and exert complete control over their lives ignoring any vestige of equal, much less, human rights. This package comes complete with honor killings, polygamy, arranged marriages, dress codes and a general demeaning and undue supervision of the fairer sex. How one accommodates these otherwise felonious activities into existing British law, I am not entirely certain. The Archbishop really didn’t explain that since he obviously thinks it a minor barrier.
One commenter remarked that Williams was a sterling example of “moral cowardice.” I could not agree more. His much lauded ability to speak eight separate languages apparently doesn’t guarantee him the right or the wit to understand any of them. I have known women who could “kill” you with a larger variety of looks, smirks, glances and leers than that and not utter a word. We are told he deserves deference for his erudite status as an academic theologian. Why? How could anyone with a scintilla of sense countenance restructuring a venerable and ancient legal code to mesh with the desires of a minority group of newcomers? Apparently all one needs to be is an “academic theologian” to deserve respect and to couch each ridiculous argument in unpronounceable words and meaningless phrases.
As a staunch proponent of liberty even I recognize that a certain number of rules are necessary for public order. Over the life of our republic, and certainly England as well, the representatives of the people have decided on many laws to insure tranquility. Some may seem unfair but they are still the law. To separate certain individuals as not subject to the law is not only unfair, it is unconscionable. If the populace, through representative governance, determines that aspects of Sharia Law should be the rule; then so be it. If not, then, learn to live with the laws as they stand.
I used to call upon a gnarly old coot in Lincoln, Nebraska who operated a furniture store and funeral parlor. In preliminary discussions of his customers needs he shared his appraisal of the world at large. Said he, “Son, there are only three kinds of people in this world: ignorant God d***** fools, educated God d***** fools, and religious God d***** fools.” It is my belief that the Archbishop of Canterbury has established that Mr. E.C. Korst of Lincoln is closest to the truth.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Monday, March 10, 2008
Monday Morning Rant 28
Are you nearly sick of listening to me rant about the global warming hoax? I doubt if I give it up until politicians, media, and other proponents of this bogus religion decide to ‘fess up and admit that it was all about money in the first place. The most offensive part of the whole matter is the similarity of the argumentation which we see by the formulators of the “new church.” They are discontent with the slow pace of God. They seem impatient that he doesn’t drop everything, come to them in a great blinding vision, and support their actions. The “warmers” on the other hand seem to want everyone to drop the most successful economic system the world has ever seen in favor of carbon offsets and planting a tree in every sandbox.
My latest irritation comes after examination of the complex financial dealings of this latter day messiah in charge of protecting the earth. After a lifetime serving the people in public office – feeding at the treasury trough – and a failed presidential bid, Mr. Gore wound up with about $2 million in total assets in 2005. A fair if modest sum for a man of accomplishment but niggardly (sorry, I refuse to give up this historically legitimate word) compared to others of his standing. His remarkable financial legerdemain since leaving office a scant three years ago has resulted in an increase of assets by an exponential sixteen times or nearly $35 million. Given the source, it seems likely that further huge increases may be anticipated.
If you care to replicate Mr. Gore’s business acumen, give Capricorn Investment Group, LLC of Palo Alto, California a try. The firm, founded by former E-Bay president, Jeffrey Skoll, has been the wellspring of this remarkable success. Skoll was also executive producer of the propaganda piece, An Inconvenient Truth, in addition to leading the environmentally sensitive hedge fund. Gore getting an average of $175,000 for speaking engagements doesn’t hurt. Additional associations with Google and Apple further solidify the leftist tilt.
Since Capricorn is primarily concerned with investments which further the environmental agenda, the “warming” talk becomes self-serving. With the all out cooperation of the media to advance his loony notions, he can hardly fail. With this much concentrated support it becomes serious business and stands as a primary example of propaganda in its finest hour. With each drop of rain which evaporates in the summer heat (normal!) and with each snail darter rescued from a fetid scum laden pond Mr. Gore will no doubt increase his net worth. Trust me, the ever benevolent government will come to the rescue and intervene to prevent any further depredation. Oh yeah, that will cost us another umpty ‘leven gazillion dollars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently a judge in California has ruled that home schooling is fine so long as the teacher (parents) have the same credentials to teach as required in public schools. This comes on the heels of a posting about the American Civic Liberty testing which I brought to your attention. Yes, I know, the issue was settled on a fine point of law. But is there no element of common sense in the California judiciary? The entire point of “home schooling” is to escape the credentialed individuals in the classrooms. The pedagogic techniques being taught in today’s preparatory teaching colleges are the foundation of parental desire to escape that influence. It tends to lean more to indoctrination than education.
I really don’t find this news unanticipated. We all knew it would only be a matter of time until some jurist under the influence of, or complaint by, the teacher’s union, would seek refuge in this principle. What more likely venue for this than California? I understand their embarrassment in having the home schooled’s accomplishments demonstrate their union minion’s incompetence. Responsible people would seek personal skill enhancement to attract students and not legal action. Apparently, the Marxist desire to seize the children to control the populace is alive and well in the United States – and has been for some time.
For those who say, “well, it’s only in California,” I would submit that legal precedent sees no borders. Without the benefit of constitutional legislative action, prior case law becomes a major governing factor in decisions. With grandchildren being home schooled in neighboring Nevada, I find this particularly alarming. As they say, “coming soon to a town near you.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Church music, where to start? I confess to being an anachronism unto myself. I have finally joined that tiny group of Christians who are begging for “that ol’ time religion.”
In recent weeks, by virtue of personal circumstance, I have visited some seven different congregations of various denominations. Many aspects of this venture have proven extremely worthwhile. Some of these preachers indeed, have fire in their belly. In no case do I accuse the faith of the members or their sincerity. My heart has been gladdened by the random prayers from the pews. Included were healings, tongues, and audience demonstrations during the services which all appeared appropriate for the congregations involved.
My only problem is that I miss the music. I really don’t object to the three-piece combos and the back up singers. I can even tolerate Jerry Lee Lewis piano stylings. However, the Object of my worship has power, authority and a limitless intellect. Daintily mouthing meaningless soft platitudes in a dirge of three chord ditties doesn’t match the full magisterial glory of my Father in Heaven. “A mighty fortress,” echoed by strong voices in concert with being numbered with the “armies of Heaven,” sounds more like the Father I attempt to emulate. I rarely see a scripture reference to the lyrics. It’s really nothing more than one aspect of the “feel good” philosophy so prevalent in Christianity today.
We routinely beseech God to provide miracles in our lives which require the ultimate in force and ability. How can we honor that power and majesty with such a collection of limp-wristed, namby pamby, pabulum? I guess I just expect too much.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
My latest irritation comes after examination of the complex financial dealings of this latter day messiah in charge of protecting the earth. After a lifetime serving the people in public office – feeding at the treasury trough – and a failed presidential bid, Mr. Gore wound up with about $2 million in total assets in 2005. A fair if modest sum for a man of accomplishment but niggardly (sorry, I refuse to give up this historically legitimate word) compared to others of his standing. His remarkable financial legerdemain since leaving office a scant three years ago has resulted in an increase of assets by an exponential sixteen times or nearly $35 million. Given the source, it seems likely that further huge increases may be anticipated.
If you care to replicate Mr. Gore’s business acumen, give Capricorn Investment Group, LLC of Palo Alto, California a try. The firm, founded by former E-Bay president, Jeffrey Skoll, has been the wellspring of this remarkable success. Skoll was also executive producer of the propaganda piece, An Inconvenient Truth, in addition to leading the environmentally sensitive hedge fund. Gore getting an average of $175,000 for speaking engagements doesn’t hurt. Additional associations with Google and Apple further solidify the leftist tilt.
Since Capricorn is primarily concerned with investments which further the environmental agenda, the “warming” talk becomes self-serving. With the all out cooperation of the media to advance his loony notions, he can hardly fail. With this much concentrated support it becomes serious business and stands as a primary example of propaganda in its finest hour. With each drop of rain which evaporates in the summer heat (normal!) and with each snail darter rescued from a fetid scum laden pond Mr. Gore will no doubt increase his net worth. Trust me, the ever benevolent government will come to the rescue and intervene to prevent any further depredation. Oh yeah, that will cost us another umpty ‘leven gazillion dollars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently a judge in California has ruled that home schooling is fine so long as the teacher (parents) have the same credentials to teach as required in public schools. This comes on the heels of a posting about the American Civic Liberty testing which I brought to your attention. Yes, I know, the issue was settled on a fine point of law. But is there no element of common sense in the California judiciary? The entire point of “home schooling” is to escape the credentialed individuals in the classrooms. The pedagogic techniques being taught in today’s preparatory teaching colleges are the foundation of parental desire to escape that influence. It tends to lean more to indoctrination than education.
I really don’t find this news unanticipated. We all knew it would only be a matter of time until some jurist under the influence of, or complaint by, the teacher’s union, would seek refuge in this principle. What more likely venue for this than California? I understand their embarrassment in having the home schooled’s accomplishments demonstrate their union minion’s incompetence. Responsible people would seek personal skill enhancement to attract students and not legal action. Apparently, the Marxist desire to seize the children to control the populace is alive and well in the United States – and has been for some time.
For those who say, “well, it’s only in California,” I would submit that legal precedent sees no borders. Without the benefit of constitutional legislative action, prior case law becomes a major governing factor in decisions. With grandchildren being home schooled in neighboring Nevada, I find this particularly alarming. As they say, “coming soon to a town near you.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Church music, where to start? I confess to being an anachronism unto myself. I have finally joined that tiny group of Christians who are begging for “that ol’ time religion.”
In recent weeks, by virtue of personal circumstance, I have visited some seven different congregations of various denominations. Many aspects of this venture have proven extremely worthwhile. Some of these preachers indeed, have fire in their belly. In no case do I accuse the faith of the members or their sincerity. My heart has been gladdened by the random prayers from the pews. Included were healings, tongues, and audience demonstrations during the services which all appeared appropriate for the congregations involved.
My only problem is that I miss the music. I really don’t object to the three-piece combos and the back up singers. I can even tolerate Jerry Lee Lewis piano stylings. However, the Object of my worship has power, authority and a limitless intellect. Daintily mouthing meaningless soft platitudes in a dirge of three chord ditties doesn’t match the full magisterial glory of my Father in Heaven. “A mighty fortress,” echoed by strong voices in concert with being numbered with the “armies of Heaven,” sounds more like the Father I attempt to emulate. I rarely see a scripture reference to the lyrics. It’s really nothing more than one aspect of the “feel good” philosophy so prevalent in Christianity today.
We routinely beseech God to provide miracles in our lives which require the ultimate in force and ability. How can we honor that power and majesty with such a collection of limp-wristed, namby pamby, pabulum? I guess I just expect too much.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Noah Builds Another Ark
This thing came in the inbox and I cannot resist sharing it with you. I wish it were funny but instead it is tragically true. If you have already seen it, read it again as a reminder. I know it is old, but it has a timeless quality about it.
"In the year 2007, the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in the United States, and said, 'Once again, the earth has become wicked and over-populated, and I see the end of all flesh before me. Build another Ark and save 2 of every living thing along with a few good humans.'
He gave Noah the blueprints, saying, 'You have 6 months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights.'
Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard - but no Ark
'Noah!' He roared, 'I'm about to start the rain! Where is the Ark?'
'Forgive me, Lord,' begged Noah, 'but things have changed. I needed a building permit. I've been arguing with the inspector about the need for a sprinkler system. My neighbors claim that I've violated the neighborhood zoning laws by building the Ark in my yard and exceeding the height limitations.'
'We had to go to the Development Appeal Board for a decision. Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark's move to the sea. I told them that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it.'
'Getting the wood was another problem. There's a ban on cutting local trees in order to save the spotted owl. I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls - but no go!'
'When I started gathering the animals, an animal rights group sued me. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. They argued the accommodation was too restrictive, and it was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space.'
'Then the EPA ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood.'
'I 'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on how many minorities I'm supposed to hire for my building crew. Immigration and Naturalization is checking the green-card status of most of the people who want to work. The trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have to hire only Union workers with Ark-building experience. To make matters worse, the IRS seized all my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with endangered species. So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least 10 years for me to finish this Ark.'
Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a rainbow stretched across the sky. Noah looked up in wonder and asked, 'You mean you're not going to destroy the world?'
'No,' said the Lord. 'The government beat me to it.'"
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
"In the year 2007, the Lord came unto Noah, who was now living in the United States, and said, 'Once again, the earth has become wicked and over-populated, and I see the end of all flesh before me. Build another Ark and save 2 of every living thing along with a few good humans.'
He gave Noah the blueprints, saying, 'You have 6 months to build the Ark before I will start the unending rain for 40 days and 40 nights.'
Six months later, the Lord looked down and saw Noah weeping in his yard - but no Ark
'Noah!' He roared, 'I'm about to start the rain! Where is the Ark?'
'Forgive me, Lord,' begged Noah, 'but things have changed. I needed a building permit. I've been arguing with the inspector about the need for a sprinkler system. My neighbors claim that I've violated the neighborhood zoning laws by building the Ark in my yard and exceeding the height limitations.'
'We had to go to the Development Appeal Board for a decision. Then the Department of Transportation demanded a bond be posted for the future costs of moving power lines and other overhead obstructions, to clear the passage for the Ark's move to the sea. I told them that the sea would be coming to us, but they would hear nothing of it.'
'Getting the wood was another problem. There's a ban on cutting local trees in order to save the spotted owl. I tried to convince the environmentalists that I needed the wood to save the owls - but no go!'
'When I started gathering the animals, an animal rights group sued me. They insisted that I was confining wild animals against their will. They argued the accommodation was too restrictive, and it was cruel and inhumane to put so many animals in a confined space.'
'Then the EPA ruled that I couldn't build the Ark until they'd conducted an environmental impact study on your proposed flood.'
'I 'm still trying to resolve a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on how many minorities I'm supposed to hire for my building crew. Immigration and Naturalization is checking the green-card status of most of the people who want to work. The trades unions say I can't use my sons. They insist I have to hire only Union workers with Ark-building experience. To make matters worse, the IRS seized all my assets, claiming I'm trying to leave the country illegally with endangered species. So, forgive me, Lord, but it would take at least 10 years for me to finish this Ark.'
Suddenly the skies cleared, the sun began to shine, and a rainbow stretched across the sky. Noah looked up in wonder and asked, 'You mean you're not going to destroy the world?'
'No,' said the Lord. 'The government beat me to it.'"
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
