Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts

July 5, 2019

Hysteria Over Climate Change is Hysterical

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It is a fact that there are noticeable similarities in the bad reasoning and worse science used by flat earthers, anti-vaxxers, chemtrail conspiracies, and several other concepts that are insulting to thinking people. You can also find parallels between evolutionary thinking and global climate change alarmism. Should we laugh or cry about the climate change hysteria?

It is difficult to decide whether to laugh or cry about climate change hysteria. Here is another example of how its proponents can be galactically stupid.
Derived from an image at ESA / NASA / SOHO
Fake science "experts" have predicted the end of the world many times (especially in some sort of climate change), but though Algore and his followers then and now have been shown to be galactically wrong.  They're on the side of the angels, you know, and have to save us from ourselves. With what, denial of science, suppression of inconvenient facts, and calling our Creator a liar? Not bloody likely.

Here is a short video that I'd take mighty kindly if you'd give a listen. (Well, I have to use the video format because audio-only is not very conducive to sharing.) It will only take three minutes. Wait for it...


March 18, 2019

Climate Change and Child Sacrifice

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

It appears that the most helpless among us are the way to solve problems. Namely, child sacrifice. Fertility problems? Kill the kids you have. Bad harvest? Kill some more children. Unable to control your lust? Dismember and murder the unborn children. The weather is not to your liking or it just plain scares you? See above.


Ancient Peruvians had a massive ritual child sacrifice to combat climate change. With abortions and leftist climate change hysteria, are we headed in a similar direction?
Aztec child sacrifice ritual image by Diego Duran via Wikimedia Commons
A recent discovery reveals that Peruvians were on the prod about the climate, so they sacrificed about 140 children and over 200 llamas (or alpacas, either way it was the Camels of the Western Hemisphere). Wow, that was way back before massive use of fossil fuels, aerosols, and what not. Can't blame humans for that change. Too bad that couldn't consult with Bill Nye the Leftist Guy, since he's an expert on everything including abortion and climate change.


While atheists will undoubtedly claim, "See what religion does?", atheism is responsible for more murders in human history. Also, their darkness has nothing to do with the truth of God as revealed in the Bible. It is the result of pagan rebellion against their Creator. But I digress.

Here we are in our "civilized" countries killing unwanted children and then doing the Mattress Mambo and then executing the results of our lusts. But I also wonder if fanatical climate change cultists will have us go along a similar path. Leftist tinhorn Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has proposed the ridiculous Green New Deal to combat global warming, and says we should not even have children until it passes. She should go back to bar tending.

Dr. Albert Mohler has some comments that I'd like you to see in the March 14, 2019 edition of The Briefing. You can listen or read the transcript for the section, "‘We must change almost everything in our current societies’: 16-year-old Swedish girl explodes onto world stage as climate change advocate". 

Many climate change fanatics insist that their view is the only view; anyone who has contrary opinions and presents facts that are suppressed by the left are liars. Suppressing data and punishing naysayers is mighty Stalinist, pard. Here is an excerpt from the Chris Plante Show on the subject:



Additional information:


July 15, 2018

Still Waiting for that Next Ice Age

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Before I get to the subject of this article, a bit of (mostly) unrelated fun stuff. Did you know that YouTube has quite a few big-name movies and television shows? We can only guess if they reverted to public domain (some have), or the copyright owners really do not care that movies like Seven Days in May (1964, Burt Lancaster, Kirk Douglas, Frederic March, Ava Gardner, and other big stars) are free to the public on YouTube. Someone mentioned a video that seemed interesting, so I tried something.

Using my Android smart phone and the YouTube app, I found the video. Then I used the connection to send it to my new friend, Roku, so I could watch it on the television device. Worked mighty fine. Apparently, since the phone and Roku are on the same WiFi network and don't have to be in the same room, the phone doesn't act like a server, so I'm not losing much battery power. When the video was over, it began to advance to the next one in the playlist on my TV. The phone app was where I had left it, and the phone was into standby, power saver, or whatever it is when it goes dark. I am not a professional, and you can try this at home.


Before the global warming/climate change propaganda, secular scientists were guaranteeing a coming ice age.
Credit for this cool picture goes to Jason VanDorsten at Freeimages
And now for our feature attraction.

Before the politically-motivated global climate change craze, replete with cherry-picked data, misrepresentation, and even fraud, the term was global warming. Some tinhorns will point to warm spells as "evidence" for it, but conveniently ignore snowfall in the Sahara Desert, as that interferes with their propaganda. Did Bill Nye have excuses for that Sahara snow thing? According to leftist Washington, DC council member Trayon White, climate change is caused by the Jews. He should get in touch with the Iranian general who also blames them, but for different reasons. No reason to dismiss the claims if they fit the narrative, right? We don't need no stinkin' reality, we got propaganda!

 Before global warming, the big scare (although less profitable for globalists and other leftists) was the coming ice age.




The difference in the two extremes of pseudoscience is a matter of degrees. 180 of them. Really? All those "facts" can change so much in such a short time? Not hardly! If I recollect rightly, global warming fanatics were embarrassed when they were reminded that the next ice age was popular in pseudoscience, so they went from calling it global warming to global climate change to hedge their bets.

Alan Landsburg was an author and movie maker with a fondness for the sensational odd stuff. He did things on ancient astronauts, the Bermuda Triangle, magic, monsters, and other things. Some of his movies began with "In Search Of..." Then he was involved in making a television series by the name, In Search Of..., narrated by Leonard Nimoy.

The video that I had fun streaming to the television was "In Search Of...The Coming Ice Age". It sounded all sciencey, with a plenty of things to scare people. Scientists said that the next ice age is coming, there is no doubt, and is already beginning. Katie, bar the door! Oh, wait. She moved to Panama or something.

Interestingly, support for the coming ice apocalypse included some of the same circular reasoning and techniques used today to frighten and tax us with global climate change. Deceived sheeple seem to be willing to pay taxes.

The unreliable ice core method calibrated by the fundamentally flawed Milankovitch Cycles made an appearance in the video. (I'll let Haywire the Stalker, uneducated as he is but still an expert in theology, astronomy, geology, biology, and everything else, well, he can refute this article — including the references.) Secular assumptions about millions of years were also prominent. There were assertions about multiple ice ages millions of years ago, but those left out the fact that secular scientists cannot account for any ice age forming and then going away, let alone, happening several times. Truth, logic, Scripture, and science indicate that there was only one Ice Age, and that was a result of the Genesis Flood.

Although I could not stand to watch this 15-minute video through because of even worse assumptions and incoherent presentation, some jaspers want the best of both worlds: global warming and an ice age. It's useful to watch if you want some exercises in spotting bad logic, or if you'd like to exercise your face by making incredulous expressions.

Earth has warming and cooling periods. It does that. I think that big hot ball in the sky has a big effect on the whole shootin' match, too.  Although secularists reject science and Scripture out of hand that challenges their presuppositions, there is a Creator who is in control, he has a plan that he has made known in the Bible. The global warming will happen in a big way (2 Peter 3:10).



February 22, 2018

Science Does Not Correct Itself

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

There is a connotation of science where scientists gather information, make a hypothesis, test it, revise as necessary, it becomes a theory, and eventually a law. Somewhere along the line the thing gets put out to pasture if the facts are recalcitrant. Such a view is not only naïve, but ignores human nature. Scientists are human, after all. 


Scoffing at new material

One expression I have encountered when discussing the origins controversy is that "science corrects itself". Aside from the reification fallacy (science is not a living thing, but scientists may correct themselves), this has been shown to be false — often in areas of technology. Great inventors were laughed at, such as Robert Fulton and the Wright brothers. It was said that if people move too fast (aside from dangerous acceleration, change of direct, and deceleration), they would have physical problems or even die. Scoffers were silenced by results. Some people attribute this ridicule to fear of technology; fear of robots and artificial intelligence may or may not be founded. I reckon it started with the industrial revolution.


Science is does not correct itself, and scientists tend to protect the consensus
Credit: Pixabay / Gerd Altmann

Phlogiston

Resistance to change has appeared in other scientific areas. People cling to the consensus; they may not want to "rock the boat". For example, scientists believed that phlogiston was the invisible ingredient that caused things to burn, and some were adhereing to it long after it was disproved.


Death in the hospital

A much more tragic insistence on consensus was with Hungarian doctor Ignaz Semmelweis. Women were dying from infections in hospitals after giving birth, and he used excellent critical thinking skills to isolate the problem and present a solution. Although he did not know why having doctors and students wash in a chlorine solution helped, deaths declined markedly. His peers laughed at him, and refused to consider the results, partly because he could not show the cause. His poorly-written treatise also hurt his purpose. He died a broken man, and he was only trying to save lives. Semmelweis was later vindicated by Pasteur and Lister. See "Ignaz Semmelweis: Medical pioneer persecuted for telling the truth" for more.


Blaming the staff

As an aside, the company where I work was having problems with completing data production. The Clock Nazi was blaming the staff for not working hard enough, and for "cheating". When I tried to offer my data processing skills and asked questions, he was blaming the day shift, while the night shift was "working harder". I pointed out that all the indications were of a software problem, since there was a major change about the time the problems began (the IT people at The Company frequently foul up the system). I wanted him to consider several factors, including timing, results, what changes were made, and other things. He insisted on blaming the staff. After he was made to go away, his views continued with his successors, since they prefer to listen to people on the inside instead of listening to the people who actually do the work. We will never know if I was on the right track or not. Admittedly, this is not about science per se, put it is about logic, human nature, and especially pride.


Overpopulation

In 1968, expert on insects Paul Ehrlich published The Population Bomb, which put people into a panic. He had projections about the bleak future of mankind due to overpopulation, which were discredited. It has been said that the entire population of the world can fit into New Zealand, New York City, Texas, Alaska...depends on who you read. I'll allow that it would be a mite uncomfortable, though. (I still have a vague memory of Overpopulation, a poster from the 1970s by John Pitre. The land was full of people packed together like sardines, with no land in sight. Probably inspired by Ehrlich. It was hysterics, not reality.) I suspicion that this population excitement was based on leftist political agendas. Even though the concepts were refuted, some people still have a kind of extreme overpopulation concept today. For more about Ehrlich and his book, I recommend the first part of this podcast of The Briefing, free to listen, download, or read the transcript.

Climate changes

For a time, it was thought that the world was going to have another ice age, and that idea persisted until fairly recently. Then it became global warming. Today, we hear most often about global climate change. There are scientists who reject man-made global warming, and the climate alarmists have been show to use faulty data and outright fraud. This fearmongering is based on old Earth and evolutionary concepts, which are based on circular reasoning and preconceptions. These fears are also based on an assumption that God does not exist or is not in control of his creation. 

Climate change is a darling of secularists, leftists, and globalists, who reject rational interpretations of true data. Instead, they prefer the hype and bad information, as climate change activists play on fears and the ignorance of science. Just look at the alarm over carbon dioxide, for example. Don't these clowns know basic science, and how plants need the stuff and give us oxygen in return? 

Evolutionary consensus

I'll end with Darwin's speculations about evolution. Although scientists disagree on so many areas, and although it has been falsified many times, Darwin's true believers crank out rescuing devices left and right. Speculations are passed off as actual scientific research, and there is an overabundance of terrible science and worse logic. Even though the logical conclusion is special creation, the implication that the Creator has told us about himself in his written Word is anathema to secularists. They are proudly rebelling against God, and upholding the erroneous consensus.

In the linked article about Semmelweis, you can see this quote: "The Semmelweis reflex is the informal name coined for the tendency of people to deny new evidence or knowledge that contradicts established beliefs or their worldview. As Semmelweis experienced, long-held ideas can remain entrenched despite potent evidence to the contrary, and people can and do persecute those who challenge the consensus, even when the consensus is wrong." Some folks go haywire and cry, "Katie, bar the door! We don't like the facts!" Evolution is an effort to remove God from the equation and essentially say that we created ourselves. God asked Job if he was going to blame God for his troubles so he could justify himself (Job 40:8), and I see many atheists and evolutionists attempting to do just that.




Pride

I'd like to add another aspect.

I believe that people want to think they're special, smart, right, and so forth. People professing atheism demonize God, the Bible, Christians, creationists, and so forth in what appears to be a pitiful effort to justify their rebellion against God. Scientists refuse to relinquish the consensus in light of new information, and the public follows what "scientists say" when it is convenient. Sure, people detest admitting they're wrong, even at their eternal peril. It all comes down to pride. That was Satan's downfall, and he's been using it to appeal to humanity ever since. God hates undue pride, and we have to rely on him to keep ours in check.

While some scientists make some corrections, a consensus can be firmly entrenched, and some will not change their views because it results in boat rocking as — well as pride problems. In addition, some scientists may have political or atheistic motives to protect the consensus. Science is definitely not self-correcting. Those who know the truth have to lead the cavalry charge up the hill and present the truth.

June 7, 2017

Donald Trump, the Paris Accord, and Globalism

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

President Donald Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement on climate change, and leftists are in a frenzy. Not that it takes much to put them into a frenzy, as this lunatic comparing Trump to Kim Jong-un before the withdrawal was official aptly demonstrates. Interesting comparison, but we're not the ones calling for the punishment of global warming "deniers". If you dare to doubt the Holy Sacraments of the left, such as global warming/climate change, abortion, gun control, sexual perversion, and to some extent, evolution, you are calling down the fire. Why do you think I use an unregistered assault keyboard?

Is Trump wrong to leave the Paris Agreement only five months into his eight years of presidency? After all, we don't want the entire planet to overheat, and it would be nice if leftists stopped smashing store windows and burning dumpsters (which may contribute to global warming). There are several serious questions to consider, but we're not getting the truth from the leftist fake news media.

Images are public domain, background from the Library of Congress,
the others from Clker clipart
Actually, there is no evidence for anthropogenic global warming, despite the skewed data and "consensus" non-science that gets reported. Bill Nye the Pretend Scientist in a Bow Tie has a lot to say, but gets put in his place by people who actually have knowledge about global warming. Climate change arguments cited by leftists are spurious. In fact, the "consensus" is not all that it's cracked up to be, and there are serious doubts about said consensus.

If you study on it a spell, you'll realize that global climate change hysteria is based on deep time evolutionary thinking, and that there is no God who is in control, so his promises in his written Word are meaningless. Biblical creationists know that our duty is to have good stewardship of Earth, but we are not called to cave in to globalists with a political agenda that is disguised as concern for the world. We also trust our Creator. For a serious, thoughtful, biblical, and definitely not sarcastic analysis of the Paris Agreement, I strongly recommend that you read the transcript or get the MP3 of Dr. Albert Mohler's podcast on the June 2, 2017 episode of The Briefing.



February 1, 2017

Blind Bias in the Secular Science Industry

Those allegedly dispassionate scientists in the secular science industry are actually blind to their biases. They are also strongly leftist in their advocacy.

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Scientists are portrayed as dispassionate, objective, and following where the evidence leads. Not hardly! They're people living in a sinful, fallen world just like the rest of us. Unfortunately, those making money in the science industry have some serious problems that stem from their materialistic worldviews and the philosophies of the age — and their political positions are on the hard left. My tax dollars at work! What follows will link you to four articles, so I hope you come back to finish reading this post.

Many of these scientists, as portrayed by their obsequious media, are the arbiters of truth. After all, they're scientists, and have the necessary tools. Their elitism shows in their blatant hatred of President Donald Trump, who has only been in office for a few days, but these yahoos have him all figured out and condemned. But that's the left, they do that. 

The leftist science industry is also very interested in education (especially evolution and global climate change), you bet your boots. They're scientists, they have the truth, and everyone else (especially Conservatives) are ideologues. But they have to convince (actually, manipulate) people with propaganda, and browbeat people they consider to be enemies. This is similar to the attitudes of people who oppose Question Evolution Day: ridicule, mockery, claiming to believe in freedom of speech as long as it meets with their approval, and so on. Typical leftists. Typical anti-creationists.

From there, they move on to a secularist jihad to fight back against the truth. Or, as they believe, against error because they have the truth. Of course, there is no reason to consider any evidence against their presuppositions and the "science" presented through poor research and circular reasoning.

Here's the first link, "Big Science Blind to Its Bias".

Now we get more involved with the political aspect of the secular science industry. They have assumed Trump is evil, as are Republicans. (I expect bias and bigotry from atheopath stalkers on the Web, but such ridiculous thinking from people who are trained and paid to think rationally is beyond the pale.) One reason to hate Trump and Pence is that they are not sheeple who follow the global warming consensus or lichen-to-leftist evolution viewpoint. They think "science" is threatened, which is based on their leftist views and on fallaciously conflating science with consensus. There is also the claim that Trump is pushing scientists to political activism. That dog won't hunt, old son. People are responsible for their own actions — at least, in the real world.

Time for the second link, "Big Science Blind to Its Political Bias". The third link ties in with it. It's a much newer post than the others, discussing leftist science resorting to fear mongering, playing the fascist card (bonus: my article on that one is here), and outright lies, click on "Big Science Goes Total Left in Opposing Trump". (Second bonus link, "The Science Industry Supports Abortion".)

The secular science industry and their feckless media are overwhelmingly materialistic, rejecting God the Creator and any evidence contrary to evolution and global warming. An aspect of their philosophy is scientism, a self-refuting view that truth comes from science. Some tinhorns go so far as to equivocate science with reason. (Then they call us "anti-science" when we have the temerity to show the flaws in their worldview.) But science can only go just so far. In fact, it is a method of interpreting observed data, and those interpretations are based on the worldview of the scientist (or anyone else, really).

Now I'll give you the final link, "Big Science Blind to Its Scientism".

What we see is consistent: leftists are blinded to the truth, oppose the truth, despise any who disagree with them, and prop themselves up at the noble elite. But they are blind fools. All of this should not be all that surprising to those of us who know the Bible. Still, it's disappointing to see people who are supposed to be (and claim to be) objective acting like angry children. At least furious leftist scientists are not smashing windows at Starbucks or burning cars. Yet.


October 27, 2011

Global Warming Rebellion is Growing

Just like evolution, Global Warming/Climate Change is supposed to be a "given", accepted at face value as unified, indisputable fact because "scientists say so". Fortunately for rational thinkers, the political and pseudo-religious agenda of Global Warming is being exposed. Some scientists have the courage to stand up and be counted, that this is a load of hooey. And the ranks are growing.
More than 1,000 dissenting scientists (updates previous 700 scientist report) from around the globe have now challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 2010 321-page Climate Depot Special Report -- updated from the 2007 groundbreaking U.S. Senate Report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus” -- features the skeptical voices of over 1,000 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC. This updated 2010 report includes a dramatic increase of over 300 additional (and growing) scientists and climate researchers since the last update in March 2009. This report's release coincides with the 2010 UN global warming summit in being held in Cancun.
Read the rest of the report here.

October 25, 2011

Global Warming as a Cult


Adherents of Global Warming/Global Climate Change tend to be irrational. That's right, I said it! They protect their viewpoints through intimidation, bullying, legislation, suppress contrary evidence, beg for money. (In fact, they use the same tactics as evolutionists — not surprising, because the political agenda of Global Warming activists is often similar to the "science" of evolutionism.)
Religious faith is a source of strength in many people's lives. But religious faith when taken too far can prove ludicrous -- or disastrous.
On Oct. 22, 1844, thousand of Millerites, having sold all their possessions, climbed to the top of hills in Upstate New York to await the return of Jesus and the end of the world. They suffered "the great disappointment" when it didn't happen.
In 1212, or so the legends go, thousands of Children's Crusaders set off from France and Germany expecting the sea to part so they could march peaceably and convert Muslims in the Holy Land. It didn't, and many were shipwrecked or sold into slavery.
In 1898, the cavalrymen of the Madhi, ruler of Sudan for 13 years, went into the Battle of Omdurman armed with swords, believing that they were impervious to bullets. They weren't, and they were mowed down by British Maxim guns.
A similar but more peaceable fate is befalling believers in what I think can be called the religion of the global warming alarmists.
 Read the rest of "Cult of Global Warming Is Losing Influence" here.

October 18, 2011

Physics Professor Says Global Warming is Pseudoscientific Fraud

Professor Harold Lewis boldly states that Global Warming is pseudoscience. The greatest pseudoscientific fraud. (I disagree, it is second to the pseudoscience of evolutionism.)

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
It's so utterly damning that I'm going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T GWPF, Richard Brearley).

April 20, 2008

As the World Burns

Buon giorno. I've found out through years of experience that I can't convince people of anything: "I have my mind made up, don't confuse me with facts". But, as I've said before, you never met a Weblog writer quite like me! I have to give my views of the truth, and I like to present evidence when I'm not too busy. And I'm finding time for this one.

Since this article is for Urf Day, I'm writing in green ink. So to speak. Ah, Urf Day. When we hear the gospel of environmentalism, tree-hugging and conservation. Sure, I'm all for conservation and being environmentally friendly. But I like it within reason. It's become quite the religion for some people, and they wear it like a badge or even get smug about it. Hey, save a tree, read online! Too bad cafones don't bother to tell you that trees are a renewable resource; they are farmed so we don't have the barren wilderness that was threatening to happen in the early 1900s.

The biggest deal that puts me off to environmentalism is the global warming hype. Yes, hype. I'm ready to take the heat for this one. (Yeah, I made a funny.) When they show that stuff on channels like Discovery, I call it, "Oh-My-Gosh-We're-All-Gonna-Die" Week. The stories are slanted and alarmist. First they tell us that we all have to work together to stop global warming because it's all humanity's fault (never mind volcanoes, how about capping them?), then some tell us that it's too late, it's irreversible, we're doomed. But "global climate change" had a different alarm in the 1970s, with scares of a coming ice age! And they want to blame humans for what is, in reality, normal cycles of warming and cooling. And global warming will lead to cannibalism. My brain hurts.

We've just had some pretty cold winters. Iraq had snow for the "first time in memory". Record snowfalls in the winter of 2007-2008. Baby, it's cold outside. Tell me something, willya? These people are using computer models, making predictions and all that for 10, 50, 100 years and more. Why in blazes do we trust them to prophesy about the end of the world when they can't even get next weekend's weather forecast right? Sure wish I could remember who said that before me so I could give proper credit.

The high priest of global warming is undoubtedly Al Gore. His Gorebal warming stuff is annoying. What's more annoying is that people are convinced by pretty pictures and believe something just because there's a video or movie with slick production. Hey, Al! You had a serious refutation by a schoolgirl's extra credit work. Too bad the Website she did seems to be down. Maybe it was taken down by those that can't handle the truth! Conspiracy! Algore is pretty reluctant to take on actual scientists in debates. Makes me wonder. No, not really.

Hey, how about those carbon offsets? That's a load of crap. Take a look at the Wall Street Journal. Or the Financial Times. It didn't take long for me to find that bit of information here, to show that it's fraud. I recently bought a bag of "Sun Chips", and I couldn't believe that they had something stamped on the bag to the effect of, "We buy carbon offsets". Oh, please. It's a false guilt conscience bandage for the wealthy; buying carbon offsets will do nothing.

I've said before that constant repetition of one viewpoint, especially masquerading as science, is nothing short of brainwashing. Guess what? There are serious scientists with opposing views, as I hinted before. Why don't we hear from them? Scientists don't like that movie he did, with good reason. I didn't waste my time watching it.

Here's one of the best parts: The Untied (misspelling intentional) Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been challenged by scientists to back off from their absurd global warming position. That's the way, take the challenge to the top! If this has gotten your attention and you want more evidence against what gets shoved in your face every day, let Thomas Brewton show you some things.

So, I laugh at Algore and tolerate rabid environmentalists. I try not to be wasteful and detest pollution. Being environmentally friendly is common sense when it's not taken to extremes, and I'm all for it. Global warming? Nah. That nonsense doesn't scare me, even though it's the current "consensus". I'm much more concerned with the effects of the Chinese communists on the Tibetans, and the rest of the world. Now that is a real problem worthy of my attention. Ciao!

Addendum 12-28-2008:
Here is another link worth reading.

Subscribe in a reader