Editor's note: The following was written by Audrey Peterman, an author, speaker, and advocate reconnecting people to nature, promoting enjoyment and stewardship of our public lands. It initially appeared on the Huffington Post.
While the 413 places and approximately 85 million acres protected in our National Park System belong to the American people, a significant number are so important to the entire human family that they sit atop the world’s greatest conservation lists: World Heritage Site, (22) Biosphere Reserve, (23) and Ramsar International Convention of Wetlands, (2). They are among the rarest of the rare on Planet Earth, of the same stature as the Great Wall of China, the Taj Mahal and the Galapagos Islands among others. So what happens to our national parks and public lands affects not just America but the world.
I started thinking about this a few weeks ago when we ran into our longtime friend Babacar M’Bow, nephew of Amadou-Mahtar M’Bow, the African who spearheaded many of these designations in his term as Secretary General of UNESCO from 1974 -1987. The legacy of mankind since we first emerged from the caves and sat around a campfire is desperately at stake in our upcoming elections.
The Democratic and Republican parties have starkly opposing views of what “public lands” should mean. The Democrats' conservation platform calls for collaborative stewardship similar to what we’ve been advancing through the Next100 Coalition. The Republican candidate scoffs at climate change and the platform aims to raid our public lands treasury and withdraw large swaths, with no benefit to the nation. So the future of our children and all the children of the world will be enhanced or greatly diminished, depending upon who is elected.
This brought me moments of extreme poignancy over the past week when we visited our grandchildren. Looking into the bright eyes of an 11-year-old who builds robots and computers, worships Elon Musk and still loves to roller board and play hide-and-seek with his friends, I felt a pang:
Am I doing everything I can and should to secure an environment in which he can live out his dreams as our ancestors did for us? In the future will he have to wear a face mask or carry oxygen when he goes out? It wasn’t so long ago that we didn’t have to buy bottled water.
I also saw vividly how the actions of our predecessors affects us today when I attended Homecoming at Morehouse College with Frank and spent time with many of his classmates, now in (or approaching) their 80s. The alma mater of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. a few miles from his birth home protected in Martin Luther King Jr. National Historic Site was teeming with the happy expectant faces of young men, joined by the beautiful young women from neighboring Spelman College.
Entering the Morehouse School of Medicine building for the alumni breakfast, I was elated to see a sign promoting an upcoming Hike Out to Cascade Springs Nature Preserve, an activity we helped spearhead many years ago as part of the Keeping It Wild program. We connected with Frank’s first roommate at Morehouse and lifelong friend, Dr. Wilbur Leaphart, an educator who revolutionized the middle school system and served as Chair of KIW for several years.
At the President’s Brunch we met a young rear admiral who told us that our son Frank Jr., was the Morehouse Man who “made him” in their fraternity. While he and Frank talked Morehouse, his wife and I talked about what national parks were easily accessible on their trips across the country, other than the ones they already visited.
Over drinks that night with two longtime Morehouse friends, I saw the light come on in Frank’s eyes as we walked down memory lane and he realized how he was tapped to go to Morehouse. One of his classmates recently retired as the Chief Design Engineer for a multi-billion dollar US Army Combat Systems program after a hugely successful career. The other chuckled when he told us how he got his Morehouse nickname, “Iron Stomach.”
“We were protesting the food and ‘mystery meat’ so it was agreed that all of us would walk out and not eat it,” he said. “But I had no choice. I had to eat it because I didn’t have 50 cents to buy a chicken sandwich off campus.” Later he was invited to the Dean’s house and to his amazement, they were eating the same food. In his career as a plastic surgeon he was at one point among the 350 highest qualified in the land. Living in Seattle they are big fans of our national parks. All three Morehouse men said there was no doubt that Morehouse was the turning point in their lives.
As I listened, I remembered Bill O’Reilly a few years ago saying he was shocked to find that Black-owned Sylvia’s restaurant in New York was just like any other restaurant, and no one was using expletives or yelling for food. The current Republican presidential candidate reveals a deplorably similar lack of awareness about Black lives and seems to get his ideas about his countrymen and women from sitcoms/reality TV. How would those two stack up at this table, I wondered? How does the calculated trumpeting of derogatory falsehoods about non-white Americans distort our perception of each other?
The grave conflict underway at Standing Rock involving First Nations striving to protect their sacred land demonstrates what happens when corporate “rights” are made to trump human rights and indigenous cultural practices. Though Standing Rock is not a national park, it isn’t difficult to imagine the damage that a pipeline can do to faraway ecosystems. The indigenous people are calling for help from all who respect their cause.
In the remaining months of President Obama’s term, our Next100 Coalition is pressing for him to establish the Freedom Riders National Monument in Anniston, AL, for all the reasons Frank listed here. More than 500 people showed up last week to speak in favor, to the satisfaction of the four surviving Freedom Riders and their allies.
This may be the last time I write before that fateful date November 8. I pray that each one of us will exercise our right to vote, and do so in a way that is responsible to the future of our public lands treasures, our country and our world.
Follow Audrey Peterman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Audreypete
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
Maybe someone could offer a little balance here: Couldn't one read the candidates in a different way? One would stuff the Boards and Departments with cronies and favor-seekers, competence be damned. The other would build monuments and take care of public infrastructure by cutting through red tape (Wollman Rink ring a bell).
How would the dramatic difference in approaches to immigration affect the Parks and Country long term? More pressure, less pressure on resources and scarce dollars dollars available for the Parks? Anyone want to venture a guess?
How does the protection of our National Parks/Forests become a racial issue? Ridiculous!
Concderned:
I said immigration sir(or ms). You said race. Maybe listen to some of the reports from our parks along the southern border. I undedrstand what an escape into some of our northern parks can be. Maybe open your eyes to the world stage. It eventually comes here and presently with increasing speed. If I get our POTUS's drift he wants those nasty Republicans to never win an election again. Now about those Parks.
"The current Republican presidential candidate reveals a deplorably similar lack of awareness about Black lives and seems to get his ideas about his countrymen and women from sitcoms/reality TV. How would those two stack up at this table, I wondered? How does the calculated trumpeting of derogatory falsehoods about non-white Americans distort our perception of each other?"
This is racial and not about immigration. I support enforcing immigration laws and protecting our Southern Border Parks. Some don't.
I know of zero NPS employees eager for the national instability inevitable in a Trump presidency.
Nice post Traveler, thank you.
National instability with Trump? Have you been paying attention for the last week - much less they last 30 years? Hilary is about to get indicted. You think that will create stability? It is amazing the ethics, morals, integrity people will sacrifice for their cause and the blind eye some will turn to it because it is their cause as well.
Yes, yes, sure. But I don't have the Breitbart-scripted alt-right blinders on, Eric. Whatever you say, sure.
I do have to agree with your last sentence, of course. Hope those tight shoes don't pinch ya too tight.
" It is amazing the ethics, morals, integrity people will sacrifice for their cause and the blind eye some will turn to it because it is their cause as well."
I agree. Those words describe his supporters to a T.
I'm thoroughly nauseated by the prospect of whichever of them may be in office.
Four years of either gridlock so dense it will make the last eight look like a free flowing mountain stream or four years of total insanity.
About all we can hope is that either she will be indicted and convicted of something, or he will. There are plenty of possibilities on both sides.
Otherwise, buckle your safety belts and hang on tight because whatever happens, we're in for one heck of a wild ride.
Rick, even the Huffpo has turned on her.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/casar-vargas/why-i-can-no-longer-suppo_1_b...
This isn't Brietbart it is the FBI
But you are blinded by your ideology.
Right, Eric. So you say.
There is a handful of known FBI agents in the NY office who attempted to start an investigaation of Secretary Clinton based on the book 'Clinton Cash', a Breitbart propaganda piece. You're being played.
I'm being played? Have your read the wiki leaks emails? They confirm many of the Clinton Cash allegations. It would appear the Weiner PC has emails that do as well since the investigation has been revived upon its discovery. There are none so blind as those that are unwilling to see.
"There are none so blind as those that are unwilling to see. "
Or listen.
But somehow playing recordings of a person's crude and outlandish comments and claiming he actually said them is unfair. Got it.
Back to Crater Lake --- I forgot about the bicycles. Yup. Coming around a blind curve and finding a bicycle in your lane with an oncoming motor vehicle coming toward you is another adventure. But CRLA doesn't have a corner on that.
Other than the usual rhetoric I see little evidence that one party actually cares more about the parks than another. Certainly the democrats have done a far better job to market themselves as the only ones who care about the environment and have managed to tie this to the parks as well. I don't think the reality bears this out. As for the candidates themselves I see little evidence that either candidate cares one bit about anything outside. They both seem to worship money for moneys sake and little else. When was the last time you heard of either candidate doing as much as going for a walk in a city park much less take a single step on a nature trail. I suspect both of them would view being out in nature on par with a trip to the dentist.
Who said claiming he actually said them is unfair? Certainly not me. But it is interesting that you seem to equate rude locker room talk from more than a decade ago with treason, perjury, bribery, illegal campaign funding and much more that is taking place now. The Clinton family is the epitomy of what you have been railing against here for years, insider pay for play politics. Who is it that isn't seeing or listening.
EC et al, I think we'd all agree that this year's choice is perhaps the worst in modern history. That said, EC, Trump's ongoing behavior, personal and in the business world, is right up there with the Clintons':
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/11/04/us/politics/ap-us-campaign-20...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/donald-trump-tax.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/us/politics/donald-trump-money.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html
And I think it's safe to say he could face charges for inciting riots, threatening the life of a presidential nominee (a crime), tax evasion and possibly more.
Just, if not more, frightening, though, are the pledges by some leading Republicans in Congress to tie up the Clinton administration and block her on just about every avenue if she wins. In other words, promise of at least four more years of political one-upsmanship in Washington to the detriment of the nation, of four more years of an 8-member Supreme Court, of no serious work on fixing the tax system or dealing with infrastructure needs.
On top of that, we now have the appearance of political favoritism by the FBI.
To say this country's political system is dysfunctional is a gross understatement, and until someone figures out how to fix it, we're all in trouble.
Exactly, Kurt. I've repeatedly tried to get across the idea that I'm nauseated by both candidates. But the bottom line is this: Which of them is the least dangerous when the choice lies only between a run of the mill lying career politician and a psychopath?
Maybe we need to be voting for the vice-presidential candidates instead of the ticket-toppers because both HRC and DJT could be indicted for any of a number of reasons. At least both of the alternates seem to be somewhat semi-sane.
Kurt,
I don't subscribe to the Times so can't read your links. Would be interested in your actual accusations. You mention taxes. What exactly is the tax issue? He has been audited virtually every year and I have yet to see any charge of tax evasion.
As to inciting riots, we have the evidence that it was the Clinton team that was sending instigators to rallies for exactly that purpose. And I would be interested in the actual quote of Trump threatening the life of a presidential nominee.
You bring up partisanship and the Supreme Court, seperately but they are related. Hillary has said she will appoint SC Justices that will support her goals. Her criteria isn't whether they will uphold the law or protect the Constitution but whether they will enable her agenda. That is as partisan as you can get and extremely in contradiction with what our Founding Fathers wanted from our Supreme Court.
Political favoritism by the FBI? The only "favoritism" was they didn't pursue her back in July because of Justice Department obstruction.
I will agree with you, neither candidate is particularly appealing. One commits perjury, treason, illegally funds their campaign, exposes classified information and sells political access while the other is boorish and says mean things.
The NY Times is not a bastion of factual reporting. Sadly, this paper is part of the State Run Media that turns a blind eye to fraud, criminal behavior, and violations of laws concerning our America's National Security.
Who among us would remain married to serial sex offender, Bill Clinton, who paid off women to settle their sex related charges and destroy a woman's life, some 25 yrs his younger, because he wanted sex and used his power and position to get it. Hillary's judgement in all areas is non existant.
I think this election will be long remembered as the first ever where the KKK, the KGB, and the FBI all supported the same candidate.
EC, you should be able to read a few Times stories before the gate goes down.
That said, the bit about inciting a riot has to do with Trump telling folks at his rallies that perhaps folks in support of the 2nd Amendment could stop Clinton, encouraging folks to "Lock her up!," etc.
As for his "audits," have you seen the results? The stories had to deal with his use of highly dubious, and now illegal, practices to make it look like he had no taxable income. While the practices apparently were borderline at the time, some of his attorneys urged him not to use them at the time, and they're now illegal. Whether he continued to use them after they were made illegal is hard to say, since he won't release his returns.
As to Supreme Court nominees, you could argue that point either way.
As for "Concerned Citizen," the Times being part of a state run media? That's laughable. Remember which paper broke the Pentagon Papers story? Or the 2015 Pulitzer they received for an investigative story that showed how the influence of lobbyists can sway congressional leaders and state attorneys general, slanting justice toward the wealthy and connected?Or the 2013 Pulitzer they landed for a series that penetrated a legal thicket to explain how the nation’s wealthiest citizens and corporations often exploited loopholes and avoided taxes?
And there are more.
How do you become worth $200 million serving the public trust? I know how Mr. Trump made his money, but how did Secretary Clinton make hers? That is what the nation should be asking.
Years ago, in 1992, I voted for Bill Clinton. But I was holding my nose even then. The story out of Arkansas, as told by THE NEW YORK TIMES (yes, it was still a great newspaper then) was very disturbing to this environmentalist. It seemed that the worst land skinning corporations in the country, starting with Tyson's Foods, had headed straight for the Ozarks, where Mr. Clinton, like any good southern governor, turned a blind eye to their pollution. I later confirmed how much pollution while on the board of NPCA. But that is confidential, and we needn't go there here. After all, we have the record. Speaking of which, Wal-Mart, which by using retrail has turned America into a Third World Country, was also front and center in the Clintons' "upbringing."
History shows that few leopards change their spots. Will Ms. Clinton suddenly be concerned about the national parks? You dream. Will she be concerned about the public lands? You bet, and will, as has Mr. Obama, turn them over to corporations as fast as she can. She said she will. She's all for solar and wind, and that means, for the Southwest alone, 40 million acres lost to the public.
I don't buy the notion that the Democratic Party is any friend of the public lands. They've sold us on that notion, but their actions don't match it. Nor is the Republican Party these days the party of Theodore Roosevelt, or for that matter Richard Nixon, who happens to have signed a great deal of environmental legislation that Mr. Obama keeps trying to get around, most notably the Endangerd Species Act (1973).
If you want to support your party, fine, but remember that it is just a party and not a collection of saints. They were burned at the stake years ago by both political parties. These days, American politics, plain and simple, are all about who gets what from whom. Secretary Clinton has always wanted to be rich. Now she is. She didn't get that way running for sainthood, and now to see her criticize Mr. Trump for being rich is laughable in the extreme. So what else can she say? He is rude, lewd, and crude. Well, look in the mirror, Madam Secretary. I hear you swear like a longshoreman at your staff. And if you didn't divorce Bill for his shennigans 20 years ago, don't complain about Mr. Trump's.
Let's simply be clear what the presidency is. It is not Pope; it is indeed president, and most American presidents have been flawed. Next week, we all get to pick our flaw. When we do, there will be hell to pay, no matter who it is. I simply hope that my pick, when I criticize him or her for failing to protect the national parks, does not call me a racist or sexist for having dared criticize the White House. Yes, I am sick and tired of that.
Again, I have to differ from Alfred, as we know Clinton's husband was pretty good to the Dept. of the Interior, why would we expect anything different with her? Most notably because I work for Interior, I have observed in my 20 years that republicans are never as generous in land acquisition as democrats.
The main thing is that Trump does not believe in climate change, so you see he is clueless and dangerous.
I really don't think it's simplistic to say that we all need to go back to Kindergarten. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could all remember and actually take to heart the wonderful lesson laid out by Robert Fulgham:
http://www.kalimunro.com/learned_in_kindergarten.html
No, I would say he understands the scientific method. Have a theory, test it, if you don't get the results you expect the theory is wrong. AGW theory has been horribly wrong with its predictions and you can't explain why.
BTW, there has been interesting work linking ozone depletion from fluorocarbons to the warming we saw in the 70s-90s. With the Montreal Protocol, offending fluorocarbons began to be phased out in the late 80s and were eliminated by 1996. The warming "pause" started shortly thereafter.
Yeah, it's all just a theory with "no accountable data"...
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201513
Where's this "Warming pause", EC? Maybe if you live in a subsurface cave, where you bury your head.
This year will definitely shatter records in the region I live. We have yet to have any significant cold front, and a lot of leaves are still green and hanging on trees that are usually bare by now.
WE can bet that little if any Federal Taxes Trump has ever paid have supported Federal Public Lands. and Agencies.
What is Trump Hiding by not revealing current Tax Forms ? ...and Oh, FBI, POLITICAL CULTURE, political as ever as though J. Edgar Hoover were reincarnated.
Learn how Warren Buffett Votes, One Multi -Billionaire who never Brags about being The King of Bankruptcy as TRUMP. And Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Companies employ at least 350,000 persons at better wages than Trump's Bankrupted
Casino Public Co. (1995-2005) which left shareholders with pennies on the dollar.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/us/politics/hillary-clinton-nebraska.html
Well that cave is pretty crowded with the likes of The Economist, the IPCC and many others.
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21598610-slowdown-r...
But then if you are NOAA and want to support your agenda, you just change the numbers to support your claims.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/noaa-fiddles-with-climate-data-to-eras...
And for every annecdotal "evidence" you can provide for warming, I can provide for cooling.
https://appalachiantrail.com/20161026/are-trails-to-katahdin-closed-for-...
I definitely don't take the word of some two-bit propagandist that pretends he's also a realtor.
NOAA's current overview that is related to today's current conditions is very accurate, just like they always are. This isn't fraud... far from it. I follow this stuff quite a bit (just about daily) and i'm sure you don't (that's evident). You just follow the whims of the far right media that parrot what you want to hear.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/201609
Just a reminder, folks, from the Traveler's Code of Conduct:
When you are making up the numbers and adjusting them to suit your theory, the last thing you are is "accurate".
That's fine. At the end of the day, I choose to not live with my head buried in the sand. Obviously, reality can be confusing to some. I saw the signs when I lived in Sun Valley, and I see it now in the Southeast - global warming is occuring and the changes are evident. Whether it's a once great river that is nothing more than a trickle during peak flow periods thanks to a prolonged decade long drought, or a lack of snowfall in the higher elevations of the Appalachians that used to face more prominent winters, the signs are there. Of course as time goes on, the deniers are not as large in number, just a lot more vocal.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sej-mountain-climate-change-20150728...
In the end....a Trump presidency will be like the Bush presidency in that we will lose another decade as the policies push us into another era of regression. Trump brings nothing to the table and his lack of vision, especially in regards to science and conservation was evident during the debates. He's just a prostitute and conman for the gambling industry, and has zero experience in government. I'm not a fan of cheesy casinos, and when it comes to visionary business leaders, Trump is no Elon Musk.
I will still vote for Hillary, because even if she goes down, i'll take Kaine anyday over Trump or Pence. I'm voting for Kaine.
I see that none of you has been reading 25 MYTHS THAT ARE DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENT: WHAT MANY ENVIRONMENTALISTS BELIEVE AND WHY THEY ARE WRONG, by Daniel B. Botkin. The key word is believe. A belief has nothing to do with science, whether political science or anything else. A belief is rather something we sell to one another, as in "I believe in God." Do I have to believe in Him if you have no proof, or rather if the proof is incomplete? Not to get caught up in climate change, but the proof is incomplete. Green leaves on the trees don't prove a thing, other than winter is late. I remember late winters when I was a kid, and lots of early springs. We welcomed then both, as I recall. Winter in upstate New York was generally brutal.
The animals and trees will migrate, provided they have the habitat. But no, that is all going under asphalt--and no one talks of that.
Instead, they talk of our giving up the best idea we ever had. Believe, brethren, believe, that if we don't we will all roast to death. Just don't see the billions we are making "selling" you on the idea that this is science.
And dare someone disagree, tar and feather him in the press. Call him every name in the book. Burn the witch! We have the figures, and 99 percent agree with us.
Baloney they do. They just know better, which is why the polls are skewed in the election, too. Who in their right mind would ever disagree with the "American Press" that Hillary Clinton is not a saint?
Well, I disagree, and my disagreement is based on facts. When the Ozarks ran with chicken entrails, blood, and fecal matter, Secretary Clinton didn't give a damn. So, yes, let's get back on the subject of how she will treat the national parks. Yes, her appointments might be better, but Bruce Babbitt is also yesterday's news. There is nothing directly in Secretary Clinton's record that indicates her choices will be as good--or better.
Fortunately, on Wednesday this will all be over, unless the election is thrown into the House. Today, according to Rasmussen Reports, both candidates remain neck in neck. So, pick your poison, but again, don't call it sainthood. These days, we are far removed from that, and yes, Kurt, THE NEW YORK TIMES is no less complicit in waving the Bloody Shirt.
Kurt..I find it equally laughable when the paper complains about those of us who take every tax deduction possible...then asserts something was illegal when the law changed. Who cares if attorneys said don't do it...if it is legal and nothing says it wasn't what is the issue. Charlie Ringel owned millions to the IRS...where was/is the NYT outrage? The emails on the corruption between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department, the FBI "heads up" and Hillary, the private email server and destruction of tens of thousands of emails, the immunity given to 5 people directly involved in the email server and destruction of emails, one of who destroyed emails weeks after a subpeona was issued,etc., where is the outrage from the NYT?
Name one event where Trump supporters blocked highways, turned over cars, were confrontational with police, started a riot!!! No, it was Bernie/Hillary supporters. There are documents that prove the Democrats, in their effort to get Hillary elected, send interns or union hacks to create problems at Trump rallies...where is the outrage from the NYT? Where is the out rage from the NYT on the minipulation of the Democratic primary?
State Run Media!!! There are so many Pulitzer Prize winning stories about Bill and Hillary criminal acts it is unbelievable but not one NYT reporters are pursuing. Do you think the NYT bosses are supressing their investigations?
I understand your political views are to the left but Hillary'scorrupt actions are so apparent and overwhelming it is difficult for me to believe you don"t see it, even worse don't believe it.
Alfred, I don't think many people that read this forum will disagree with you that paving the world in asphault, or cutting down massive swaths of forests is benefiting the situation. I think that is evident and many of us DO fight against that from happening.
And yes, green leaves still hanging on the trees is a data point, that can pinpoint signs to many environmental factors, especially if the peak color date starts to extend later and later over the next decade..
Well, now we know Alfred is one of the sceptics of Climate Change. That explains some things!
Frankly, I note that none of the skeptics have lived in Alaska, where the changes are obvious all about you.
Concerned,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/us/politics/hillary-clinton-presidenti...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/opinion/chappatte-on-hillary-clintons-...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/us/politics/clinton-trump-investigatio...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/us/fbi-james-comey-hillary-clinton.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/11/03/us/politics/ap-us-campaign-20...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/11/02/us/politics/ap-us-campaign-20...
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/11/01/us/politics/ap-us-campaign-20...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/us/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails-fundr...
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/18/sanders-campaign-...
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/22/us/clinton-got-list-of-rich-donors-for...
And it goes on and on. As I said earlier, neither of these nominees are what we'd like to see.
P.S. -- Just hit the "save" key once.
Skeptics is spelled with a k, argalite, and actually has a religious connotation. Webster's: "1. an adherent or advocate of skepticism. 2. a person disposed to skepticism esp. regarding religion or religious principles."
Why did the media choose skeptic over heretic? Because those pretending to be "objective" prefer being subtle. Heretic says it boldly, while skeptic says it between the lines. Heretic: "1. a dissenter from established church dogma esp. a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth 2. one who dissents from an accepted belief or doctrine: NONCONFORMIST"
Just how did these words come to be applied to SCIENCE? In science, when I disagree, I am not "dissenting" about anything. I am rather pointing to my facts. The whole idea of "dissent" when applied to science makes a mockery of science itself.
So yes, the media ignores the proper words, because the proper words require wisdom and thought. It's all about sound bites, now.
I don't "dissent" from global warming. I rather ask what is the proper response. Make it worse by losing our public lands? How will that solve the problem?
Meanwhile, it is perfectly legitimate that scientists "discuss" what exactly is the problem. If they didn't, it wouldn't be science. Words like dissenter, skeptic, and heretic are for religion and not for science.
So no, I am not a skeptic. But yes, I am a Doctor of Philosophy, and know the difference between words that inform a discussion rather than defend someone's personal agenda or belief.
As you say, argalite, I hope that "explains some things!" Certainly, today it explains how word choice can make or break an argument, which again has little to do with science.
Here is one on the candidates position on the Environment:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-trump-energy-environment_us_...
Kurt,
I assume those NYT articles are ones addressing some of Clinton's crimes in response to Concern's claims they aren't pursuing the story. How many anti-trump articles have they had over the same time frame. Here is an interesting story regarding the coverage of wikileaks vs the groping allegations. It found 23x the coverage of the groping. While Concerned might have been inaccurate by suggesting the media isn't pursuing the story at all, he certainly is on the mark exposing the level of bias.
EC, I'm not trying to defend news coverage, just pointing out that it's not as one-sided as Concerned thinks.
As for the groping coverage vs. emails, frankly, it has legs that emails don't. (no pun)., E.G., the story breaking, Trump denying that was his behavior but rather just lockerroom talk, nine or ten women coming forward over a number of days.
Whereas with the email story, it broke, was investigated by the FBI, which said there was no criminal wrongdoing involved, Clinton apologized, pretty much end of story. And unless anything criminal is found in the latest batch that turned up, it's much ado about nothing, no? And if something criminal turns up, the media will have at it.
That said, the majority of the media world out there is united against Trump, and it shows in their editorial and op-ed pages. It's a fascinating time in the history of journalism. Fascinating watching the division among conservative media, too.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/03/500480125/complaints-of-media-bias-come-fr...
The emails have no legs? I had a Top Secret/AEC clearance and if I did what she did I woud still be in jail. Anyone who knows anything about security clearance violations can attest. The DOJ/Lycnch gave Hillary an unprecedented pass and Comey and the FBI got thrown under the bus. Since when does the FBI determine whether a case is, or is not, a prima facia case? That is up to Fed Attorneys and Lynch not the FBI. The NYT knows that but never investigated why? But then, a more important story is an unsubstantiated claim of groping or an individual using the tax codes one's advantage!! BTW Trump apologized for his indescretions but not "pretty much end of story" like with Hillary.
Maybe I am old fashioned but I believe in the rule of law, whether it is immigration law, federal laws on national security or clearances, tax codes, etc., I just wish Lynch, Comey, and Holder shared my view.
Talking about media bias, just saw this:
Oops.
Also today, Rudy bragging about how he and the Trump campaaign heard the FBI leaks, from FBI sources, ahead of any official release of info. But of course, those FBI folks were just being professional in their actions.
Skepticism or scepticism (see spelling differences) is generally any questioning attitude or doubt towards one or more items of putative knowledge or belief.
Alfred, what a biased person you are!
I believe he means it was a mistake to say it, not that it wasn't true. My God, have you looked at the wikileaks emails? If she isn't indicted it could only be due to obstruction just as Bret said.
One hand: email
Other hand: sexual assault, a proven ability to lose 900 million dollars in a single year, a rejuvenation of white supremicists, upcoming trial for rape of a 13 year old girl, and so much more.
Sure, I'll worry about the email.
Rick - its not the "email" its the deeds exposed by the emails, corruption. illegal campaign funding from overseas, pay for play politics, money laundering through the Clinto foundation, rigging the primaries, telling the public one thing and believing and intending to do something quite different. The proof is all there to see. (though putting her email on a unsecured private server and putting our national security at risk is certainly an important item as well) Versus a number of unproven allegations from actions decades before. And your white supremicists comment is pure BS. Trump isn't and never has been a white supremicists nor has he ever endorsed their white supremicists views.
But you know what. Those aren't the reasons I am against Hillary. It is her policies and particualrly the damage she intends to do to the Supreme Ct. that scares the heck out of me.
Pages