Careful what you wish for....

Thursday, October 30, 2008
Via Drudge, Australia is joining none other than China in censoring the internet. Here’s a surprising endorsement/justification the writer uses to bottom line the article:

photo credit: fathersonline.orgThe Australian Christian Lobby, however, has welcomed the proposals. Managing director Jim Wallace said the measures were needed. “The need to prevent access to illegal hard-core material and child pornography must be placed above the industry’s desire for unfettered access,” Mr Wallace said.

I’m not endorsing porn. But earth to Mr. Wallace: Scan up a few ‘graphs and note how Chinese Keepers of Internet Purity shield their masses against illegal “spiritual movements.” Makes me wonder how long the internet will be available to Christian “industries” like outreach and evangelism. Not too long, considering some Christians are readily turning those reigns over to government.

Jesus didn’t condemn prostitutes or demand that His disciples lobby for nanny states. He offered them grace and holiness and a new life, and people took Him up on it.
Bookmark Careful what you wish for....  at del.icio.us Digg Careful what you wish for.... Bloglines Careful what you wish for.... Technorati Careful what you wish for.... Bookmark Careful what you wish for....  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Careful what you wish for....  at Furl.net Bookmark Careful what you wish for....  at reddit.com Bookmark Careful what you wish for....  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?

Friday, December 7, 2007
Here at Global Warming Consensus Watch World Headquarters we’re bold. We push the limits. We tackle subjects that other bloggers just don’t have the guts to tackle (I’m looking at you, Ballor). And if that means we need to do a post on kangaroo flatulance, then that’s what we do.

But what, you may be asking, does the gassy emission of the herbivorous marsupial of the family Macropodidae, of Australia and adjacent islands, have to do with climate change? We’re glad you asked! It seems that our bouncy buddies from the land down under may play a central role in opening up a whole new class of offsets:
AUSTRALIAN scientists are trying to give kangaroo-style stomachs to cattle and sheep in a bid to cut the emission of greenhouse gases blamed for global warming, researchers say.

Pardon me.
Thanks to special bacteria in their stomachs, kangaroo flatulence contains no methane and scientists want to transfer that bacteria to cattle and sheep who emit large quantities of the harmful gas.

While the usual image of greenhouse gas pollution is a billowing smokestack pushing out carbon dioxide, livestock passing wind contribute a surprisingly high percentage of total emissions in some countries.

"Fourteen per cent of emissions from all sources in Australia is from enteric methane from cattle and sheep,’’ said Athol Klieve, a senior research scientist with the Queensland Government.

"And if you look at another country such as New Zealand, which has got a much higher agricultural base, they’re actually up around 50 per cent,’’ he said.

Link courtesy of Weasel Zippers. One wonders - who was the courageous scientist who discovered that kangaroo gas contains no methane?

This development may prove more important to Australia that it seems at first glance, as on the heels of this report comes news that new Aussie PM Kevin Rudd, fresh off an election victory over John Howard, has already backed away from an election pledge to sharply cut greenhouse gas emissions after finding out that in doing so, electricity costs would skyrocket:
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd last night did an about-face on deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, days after Australia’s delegation backed the plan at the climate talks in Bali.

A government representative at the talks this week said Australia backed a 25-40 per cent cut on 1990 emission levels by 2020.

But after warnings it would lead to huge rises in electricity prices, Mr Rudd said the Government would not support the target.

The repudiation of the delegate’s position represents the first stumble by the new Government’s in its approach to climate change.

You’d think that would be something he could have looked into before making the promise. Ah well, no matter - There are other things that Australians can do to make up the difference...
Bookmark Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?  at del.icio.us Digg Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet? Bloglines Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet? Technorati Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet? Bookmark Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?  at Furl.net Bookmark Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?  at reddit.com Bookmark Global Warming Consensus Alert - Gassy 'Roos to Save Planet?  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Questions for Dr Gregg

Monday, August 6, 2007
Australian blogger Barney Zwartz, writing for the Australian newspaper The Age, tracks down intrepid research director Sam Gregg, who participated in a Melbourne book launching for Catholic Social Teaching and the Market Economy. After noting that “it seems counter-intuitive to me to consider market-theorist heroes such as Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Reagan friends of the poor,” Zwartz asks:
Is Dr Gregg right? Is a market economy the primary tool for addressing poverty, are other economic approaches better, or are there still-deeper issues that underlie the economic? And what about the churches? Vatican teaching on economics in the past century has been socially liberal, endorsing the right to trade unions for example. The churches still play a leading role in welfare, usually with some government funding. (Often this dissatisfies Christians, who think the agencies become hostage to government policy, and non-believers, who feel the churches are an anachronism who should have no role.) Is this partnership a problem? Should the churches do less - or more? Do other faiths have a better approach? What is the morality of welfare, and how does it apply? Should the old notion of the deserving poor regain some purchase or is welfare simply an obligation of a civilised society, as part of which we accept that some people will take unfair advantage? Is poverty an institutional or a personal responsibility - what do you do to help?
Bookmark Questions for Dr Gregg  at del.icio.us Digg Questions for Dr Gregg Bloglines Questions for Dr Gregg Technorati Questions for Dr Gregg Bookmark Questions for Dr Gregg  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark Questions for Dr Gregg  at Furl.net Bookmark Questions for Dr Gregg  at reddit.com Bookmark Questions for Dr Gregg  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!