?

Log in

Apr. 28th, 2008

weird dwight

The early bird gets the worm.

Today, I saw the early bird getting the worm. Of course, this is all relative since I rolled out of bed at 8:51. I'm sure that's hardly early in bird time. I had never seen this happening before, so I was intrigued. It looked like the bird was tugging on a pink piece of string.

Nov. 6th, 2007

weird dwight

(no subject)

I feel good and happy.

Oct. 14th, 2007

weird dwight

TI Was Arrested

J a Ys 3 n (2:10:29 AM): woah
J a Ys 3 n (2:10:31 AM): mailan
J a Ys 3 n (2:10:33 AM): TI got arrested

chiChaimai (6:59:17 AM): hi mailani
chiChaimai (6:59:27 AM): ok well, guess what!
chiChaimai (6:59:32 AM): TI was arrested

Except I already knew because it was a on the cnn.com homepage!

Jun. 21st, 2007

weird dwight

Missing Lake, Companies Going C-Neutral, Planet Pluto, Outer Space

  • Chilean Lake Drained?
  • Nice
  • Just Let Pluto Be a Planet :(
  • Zenon
  • Jun. 20th, 2007

    weird dwight

    An Incomplete List of Songs That Feel Good

    In no particular order:

    Dancing in the Moonlight by Toploader
    Kiss Me by Sixpence None the Richer
    Stand by Me by Ben E. King
    Mr. Blue Sky by Electric Light Orchestra
    Spectacular Views by Rilo Kiley
    Sugar Pie, Honey Bunch by Temptations
    Here Comes the Sun by The Beatles
    Be Without You by Mary J. Blige
    Across the Universe by Fiona Apple or The Beatles
    Do You Realize? by Flaming Lips
    Such Great Heights by Postal Service
    Crazy for This Girl by Evan and Jaron
    Summertime by Miles Davis or Sarah Harmer
    Mondo Bongo by Joe Strummer and the Mescaleros
    New York State of Mind by Billy Joel
    Float On by Ben Lee (Modest Mouse cover)
    El Scorcho by Weezer
    Two Weeks in Hawaii by hellogoodbye
    O Holy Night! by Sufjan Stevens
    L.O.V.E. by Frank Sinatra
    Sea of Love by Cat Power and Myra Lee
    Stranger in the Night by Frank Sinatra


    What are songs that make you feel good?

    Apr. 15th, 2007

    weird dwight

    Inconvenient Kyoto Truths

    Inconvenient Kyoto Truths
    Was life better when a sheet of ice a mile thick covered Chicago? Was it worse when Greenland was so warm that Vikings farmed there?
    By George F. Will
    Newsweek

    Feb. 12, 2007 issue - Enough already. It is time to call some bluffs. John Kerry says that one reason America has become an "international pariah" is President Bush's decision to "walk away from global warming." Kerry's accusation is opaque, but it implies the usual complaint that Bush is insufficiently enthusiastic about the Kyoto Protocol's binding caps on emissions of greenhouse gases. Many senators and other experts in climate science say we must "do something" about global warming. Barack Obama says "the world" is watching to see "what action we take."

    Fine. President Bush should give the world something amusing to watch. He should demand that the Senate vote on the protocol.

    Climate Cassandras say the facts are clear and the case is closed. (Sen. Barbara Boxer: "We're not going to take a lot of time debating this anymore.") The consensus catechism about global warming has six tenets: 1. Global warming is happening. 2. It is our (humanity's, but especially America's) fault. 3. It will continue unless we mend our ways. 4. If it continues we are in grave danger. 5. We know how to slow or even reverse the warming. 6. The benefits from doing that will far exceed the costs.

    Only the first tenet is clearly true, and only in the sense that the Earth warmed about 0.7 degrees Celsius in the 20th century. We do not know the extent to which human activity caused this. The activity is economic growth, the wealth-creation that makes possible improved well-being—better nutrition, medicine, education, etc. How much reduction of such social goods are we willing to accept by slowing economic activity in order to (try to) regulate the planet's climate?

    We do not know how much we must change our economic activity to produce a particular reduction of warming. And we do not know whether warming is necessarily dangerous. Over the millennia, the planet has warmed and cooled for reasons that are unclear but clearly were unrelated to SUVs. Was life better when ice a mile thick covered Chicago? Was it worse when Greenland was so warm that Vikings farmed there? Are we sure the climate at this particular moment is exactly right, and that it must be preserved, no matter the cost?

    It could cost tens of trillions (in expenditures and foregone economic growth, here and in less-favored parts of the planet) to try to fine-tune the planet's temperature. We cannot know if these trillions would purchase benefits commensurate with the benefits that would have come from social wealth that was not produced.

    In 1997, when the Kyoto Protocol's essential provisions were known, a "sense of the Senate" resolution declared opposition to any agreement that would do what the protocol aims to do. The Senate warned against any agreement that would require significant reductions of greenhouse-gas emissions in the United States and other developed nations without mandating "specific scheduled commitments" on the part of the 129 "developing" countries, which include China, India, Brazil and South Korea—the second, fourth, 10th and 11th largest economies. Nothing Americans can do to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030.

    The Senate's resolution expressed opposition to any agreement that "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States," which the Senate correctly thought Kyoto would do. The Senate said any agreement should be accompanied by "a detailed explanation of any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required to implement" it, and an analysis of the agreement's "detailed financial costs and other impacts" on the U.S. economy.

    The president is now on the side of the angels, having promised to "confront" the challenge of climate change. The confronting is one reason for his fascination with new fuels. (Another reason, he says, is U.S. imports of oil from unstable nations. Our largest foreign source of oil is turbulent Canada. Our second largest is Mexico, which is experiencing turbulence because of the soaring cost of tortillas. They are made from corn, which is ... well, read on.)

    Ethanol produces just slightly more energy than it takes to manufacture it. But now that the government is rigging energy markets with mandates, tariffs and subsidies, ethanol production might consume half of next year's corn crop. The price of corn already has doubled in a year. Hence the tortilla turbulence south of the border. Forests will be felled (will fewer trees mean more global warming?) to clear land for growing corn, which requires fertilizer, the manufacture of which requires energy. Oh, my.

    President Clinton and his earnest vice president knew better than to seek ratification of Kyoto by a Senate that had passed its resolution of disapproval 95-0. Fifty-six of those 95 senators are still serving. Two of them are John Kerry and Barbara Boxer. That is an inconvenient truth.



    First of all, Will probably should approach the issue from the point of view of a scientist and think of of the earth in terms of a biosphere. "Small changes," like a few degrees Farenheit in a century, can actually have a big impact. We don't have to look far to see that the properties that govern life need to be kept within a very narrow range: the pH in our bodies need to be kept within a very small range (between 7.3/7.4?). If we go any higher or lower, it is probably indicative of disease. It's called homeostasis, and I think it applies to all life.

    Secondly, there has been evidence that shows most climate change has occured within the last 30-50 years. What has been the biggest change in terms of activity on Earth? We can't attribute everything to cow farting... this article even hints at our economic success at the expense of the environment in terms of CO2 emissions. How can we say that we have nothing to do with the climate change? Or, how can we even say that we are not sure of our role? We had to have done something; maybe we can't be sure about what.

    Alright, I don't know much about the Kyoto Protocol, but I thought that there are specific scheduled commitments to when each country should reach its goal. Maybe Will meant a synchronized scheduled commitment for a synchronized emissions level?

    I think we can do things to remedy the current state of the environment. On an individual scale, they can be small things too. If everyone never did anything right when someone else is doing something wrong, no good would ever happen.

    Sep. 11th, 2005

    weird dwight

    (no subject)

    :)

    Feb. 17th, 2005

    weird dwight

    The Good Life

    My life is really good right now, and I'm happy. I just wanted to make note of it.

    Jun. 18th, 2001

    weird dwight

    The Blossoming of a New Journal

    Hello. It's 1:55 p.m., and I shall be picked up in half an hour by Kelly. I have the feeling I'm forgetting something; but usually, I don't forget anything, and my intuition is just screwed up. After hearing the Personal Fitness horror stories, I'm wondering if I should take Speech during the summer instead. I happen to like computers and want to take computer courses all year. Hopefully, I won't be the only freshman. I got Kelly a Wet Seal gift card like she wanted. I couldn't find any Linkin Park posters ANYWHERE. I should complain about that because of the fact that I want one, too. Anyway, this journal seems very user friendly.