Quantum Spin

Well, due to some spammer having found this obscure blog, I have been forced to refuse Anonymous posts. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause for legitimate posters, but since I am unable to send feedback to the offending servers causing them to explode and burst into flames - well, I do what I can. Thank you to all my sincere commentators and may the spammers rot in digital agony.

Friday, July 06, 2007

More Of That Fluff Science

And, from the magazine, Science, that rag!

Oldest DNA ever recovered shows warmer planet: report

Jul 5 03:14 PM US/Eastern

Scientists who probed two kilometers (1.2 miles) through a Greenland glacier to recover the oldest plant DNA on record said Thursday the planet was far warmer hundreds of thousands of years ago than is generally believed.

DNA of trees, plants and insects including butterflies and spiders from beneath the southern Greenland glacier was estimated to date to 450,000 to 900,000 years ago, according to the remnants retrieved from this long-vanished boreal forest.

That contrasts sharply with the prevailing view that a lush forest of this kind could only have existed in Greenland as recently as 2.4 million years ago, according to a summary of the study, which is published Thursday in the journal Science.

If the planet was "far warmer hundreds of thousands of years ago than is generally believed," where did that heat come from?

After all, the present heat levels are assigned to human-induced greenhouse gasses. Obviously - well, it should be obvious, anyway - this was not the case hundreds of thousands of years ago, a time when it was WARMER.

But, I guess Science is another Big Oil sponsored rag, right?

And, then there's this;

They also indicated that during the last period between ice ages, 116,000-130,000 years ago, when temperatures were on average 5 C (9 F) higher than now, the glaciers on Greenland did not completely melt away.

Well, whaddya know...

Even though it was HOTTER, Greenland's glaciers didn't melt away entirely.

And, since then, they actually grew back.

Imagine that.

Labels: , ,

Monday, July 02, 2007

Big Brother Will Be Watching

Even though the Texas legislature is nearly unanimous in opposing this new technology, TxDOT is still going ahead with it;

Texas DOT to Install
Federally Funded Highway Speed Cameras

Despite the opposition of the state legislature, the Texas Department of transportation proposes a federally funded speed camera test.

Despite the near-unanimous opposition in the state legislature to the use of speed cameras, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is moving forward on a proposal to deploy photo radar on state highways using federal gas tax funds. Legislation awaiting Governor Rick Perry's signature prohibited only municipalities -- like Marble Falls and Rhome -- from installing automated speeding ticket systems. It was silent on the possibility of a state-run system.

So much for Government of the People, by the People, for the People. The People, via their duly elected representatives, have spoken that they do NOT want this system. Yet, the executive is going ahead with it anyway. I have come to regret having voted for Rick Perry and have written to him expressing that regret.

Not that it will do any good. He is ignoring the voices of millions of Texans by ignoring the will of the Legislature. Why should he care about a letter from an individual?

That aside, is the goal of this system to make the roads safer?Is it to ensure compliance with the law?

Of course not.

This is the goal;

In its request for proposals, TxDOT cited success of speed cameras in the UK and Washington, DC. The UK government generated 120 million pounds (US $240 million) in revenue in 2003 while the Washington, DC red light and speed camera program has issued $217 million in tickets since 1999.


That is the goal - to generate funds for the State. This is a tax, not a law enforcement effort. It is a tool to generate revenue.

Another interesting tidbit is this;

TxDOT's vendor will send notices -- warnings at first -- to motorists driving just 5 MPH over the limit with an accuracy level of +/- 2 MPH[.]
It's not even being monitored or enforced by duly appointed law enforcment officers of the State. It is being monitored and enforced by the vendor, a private entity.

Then, there's the Sixth Amendment. The one that says "[T]he accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him[.]"

How can a camera be a witness? A camera is not a living being.

Get me on a Jury and I don't care if the camera caught you doing 110 in a school zone - I'll acquit. I will not support this system in any way or for any reason.

Labels: , , , ,