Things Are Bad

But they are going to get much, much worse.

The first study to integrate all prior scientific research in order to project approximately when climate change will produce permanent catastrophic consequences has been accepted and will soon be published in the scientific journal Nature, and it finds that things will start going haywire in the tropics at around the year 2020, and in our part of the world at around 2047.

Nature shares with Science and PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) the distinction of being tied as the world’s three most prestigious scientific journals, and an article is not published in these journals unless it has undergone extremely rigorous scientific peer-revue; so, climate-change deniers will have no professional credibility in attacking this study, as the Koch brothers and their friends can reasonably be expected to do, since they profit so much from what causes global warming - the burning of carbon-based fuels.

According to this study, the tropics, which are the near-equatorial region of this planet that’s almost 100% impoverished, and that has thus contributed virtually nothing to global warming, will begin the period of permanent catastrophe starting in approximately 2020; but the (cooler) moderate-latitude countries, such as in North America and Europe, will begin this catastrophic period in or around 2047.

As if things weren't already bad enough. Consider the plight of the Great Barrier Reef:

Corals, which are animals, have a symbiotic relationship with algae that give them their colour and help provide them with food. During stressful conditions such as heat waves, the algae disappear from the corals, leading to coral bleaching. If the stressful conditions last more than eight weeks, the corals can die of starvation.

Meanwhile, on our own continent, scenes like the following are becoming increasingly, distressingly common:



Clearly, the days of willful ignorance, selfishness and heedlessness are now exacting a massive price.

A Pill For The Times

Our American cousins and the Conservative Party of Canada (especially Kellie Leitch and Chris Alexander) could benefit from this prescription, but I suspect their response would be, "Just say no to drugs."

Some Fascinating Speculation

I readily admit to not following U.S. politics too closely; my emotional resilience has limits. However, given the American media saturation coverage of Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton, it has been hard to ignore the run-up to their respective parties' presidential nominations. Never, it seems, has either party offered such unpopular and unpalatable mainstream candidates.

In his column today, Tony Burman says there is ultimately little cause for concern if, as many are suggesting, Hillary Clinton will be forced to withdraw from the race should she be indicted for her unauthorized use of a private email server while serving as Barack Obama's Secretary of State.

Dismissing Bernie Sanders as unacceptable to the party establishment, Burman points out that unlike the Republicans, delegates to the Democratic convention are free to vote for any candidate, regardless of primary results, and he suggests that candidate may very well be Vice-President Joe Biden:

He originally declined to run due to the death of his son, but has told friends that he regrets that decision.

In early May, a story appeared on the Politico website that created considerable buzz. It quoted sources close to Biden indicating that, had he decided to run, Biden would have chosen Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as his running mate. Warren is a widely respected financial authority who supports breaking up the big banks to prevent another global crisis. On Tuesday, she enthralled a Washington audience by tearing into Trump, calling him a “small, insecure money-grubber.” It was a devastating performance — a real carving up of Trump — that gave some indication of how effective she would be on the campaign trail.

Whether any of this comes to fruition is anyone's guess. I suspect, however, that given the impressiveness and integrity of Elizabeth Warren, she will be a force to be reckoned with in the years to come.

A Reminder Of What We Have Done To Our Planet

Tornadoes may be nothing new, but their increasing intensity is. This is where our heedlessness has brought us:

It's A Strange World, Isn't It?

The above title, taken from the 1986 film Blue Velvet, seems particularly appropriate for the subject of today's post, one that has nothing directly to do with politics but perhaps epitomizes the sorry state of humanity.

In Norway, there is a young woman named Nano who believes she is a cat.

Nano claims to possess many feline characteristics including a hatred of water and the ability to communicate simply by meowing.

The young woman shows off her cat characteristics by wearing fake ears and an artificial tail. She communicates by meowing.
"I realised I was a cat when I was 16 when doctors and psychologists found out what was "the thing" with me. Under my birth there was a genetic defect".

This 'genetic defect,' she claims, has given her cat-like powers far beyond the limits of ordinary mortals. She can, for example, hear things others can't:

"Suitcases rolling on the ground," she says, "Keys clinking in pockets. People with ice under their shoes."

"I can see better in the dark than in daylight. That's no problem," she says. "I have been running a lot after animals that can be seen in the shadows."

But wait. There's more!

Nano prefers to crawl around on her hands and knees, and paws at windows when she wants to go outside.

She also said, despite their size, she can sleep in the sink and on windowsills.

"It's also obvious that I'm a cat when I start purring and meowing," she explains. "And walking around on four legs and stuff like that."

For those inquiring minds out there, the delicate subject of kitty litter boxes was not brought up.



And for the dog people who might feel left out, there is this:



And this:



As Johnny Carson used to say, "I do not make these things up, folks, I merely report them."

Your Morning Smile

Enjoy.


H/t Toronto Star

The Police State Edges Closer

Perpetually down in the mouth because they are expected to be accountable whenever they beat, shoot or kill a member of the public, police officers in the United States will undoubtedly be buoyed up by legislation that has been passed in Louisiana. The bill, clearly serving to minimize and marginalize the "Black Lives Matter" movement, is entitled "Blue Lives Matter" and would classify any violent attack on police officers, firefighters, and EMS personnel a hate crime.

Louisiana State representative Lance harris had this to say about the bill:

“I certainly do think there is a need for it. If you’re going to have an extensive hate crime statute then we need to protect those that are out there protecting us on a daily basis,” Harris said. “There is a concerted effort in some areas to terrorize and attack police and I think this will go forward and stop that.”

Not everyone agrees:

Anti-Defamation League Regional Director Allison Padilla-Goodman pointed out that crimes against police officers are already aggressively prosecuted under Louisiana law: “The bill confuses the purpose of the Hate Crimes Act and weakens its impact by adding more categories of people, who are already better protected under other laws.”

In fact, the notion of a hate law for an occupational category weakens real hate laws, which were enacted for a particular purpose:

“Hate Crimes are designed to protect people’s most precious identity categories,” Padilla-Goodman said, “like race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, ethnicity, and gender identity. Proving the bias intent is very different for these categories than it is for the bias intent of a crime against a law enforcement officer.”

As you will see in the following news report, something very similar to Louisiana's bill is now before Congress:



Just one more step, some would argue, in bringing the police state to full fruition.