The text reads:

Global Warming is real. And I should care because…

• Average temperatures have climbed 1.4° F since 1880.The 20th century’s last two decades were the hottest in 400 years.
• Arctic ice is rapidly disappearing. Polar bears and indigenous cultures are already suffering from the sea-ice loss.
• The extreme weather events such as wildfires, heat waves, and strong tropical storms are in part to blame.

So, the weather changes. This is big news?

• Humans are pouring carbon dioxide into the atmosphere much faster than plants and oceans can absorb it.
• Industrialization, deforestation, and pollution have greatly increased atmospheric concentrations of water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Though the magnitude of these changes are currently uncertain, we should be concerned with our effects on the environment if not for us then for future generations.

But what can I really do? Examples include:

Recycle | Reuse shopping bags
Take a shower instead of a bath | Use less hot water
Plant a tree | Protect and conserve forests worldwide
Buy locally grown and produced foods | Eat less meat
Choose a more fuel efficient vehicle | Check your tires often to make sure they’re properly inflated | Keep your car tuned up | Consider ride sharing, carpooling, and/or public transportation

Sources:

• National Geographic
• Environmental Protection Agency
• Environmental Defense Fund
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
• Global Warming Facts

More Sources:

• New Scientist
• Science Daily
• Scientific American

Learning is fun! ;)

Also seen: interhuss | flickr

SHARE MORE

As far as contributing, anyone can create a wiki entry, so if you have resources you’d like to share feel free to do so. As I said though, this project is in it’s infancy and I’m not entirely sure we are going to stick to the wiki format/platform. I’ve recently checked out Drupal (per db0′s inference) and I am digging that quite well. BitWeaver has quite a bit of functionality as well.

All-in-all I am excited about this project and in spreading the “word”, so-to-speak.

SHARE MORE

From the Church of Scientology and it’s front group the CCHR (Citizens Commission on Human Rights) here is a series of videos that attempt to destroy the good work done by mental health professionals.

Scientology has been changing their focus though their numerous front groups such as the CCHR. They are setting up a massive campaign against psychiatrists and drug companies.

It’s high time that psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors and scientists involved in the betterment of mental health get involved in opposing Scientology. The group Anonymous and many long term critics has been hard at work fighting the abuses of Scientology and it’s front groups, but we have yet to see any people involved in mental health join our ranks. (maybe there were I didn’t see any)

This video series is horrible, but the general public may believe it. It’s total manipulation with many short out of context quotes.

http://psychdrugs.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/a-documentary-making-a-killing-the-untold-story-of-psychotropic-drugging/
Video 1 of 10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sYhTdeLRM8

It is a fact that psych drugs have done tremendous good for people with mental problems. The evidence during the last 40 years is overwhelming, yet the scientologists are trying to destroy that, and all it takes is doubt in the mind of most people. Most of you know how horrible the situation was BEFORE psych drugs, but the video ignores that and makes all these horrible unsubstantiated claims. For example, suicides do happen but generally happen when people STOP taking their meds. They also don’t mention how many suicides happened to members of the scientology.

We must stop this nonsense. Don’t let the same thing happen to what the creationists did with evolution. It’s time to nip that one in the bud. Please pass this along to any mental health professionals you know.

Some resources:
http://www.xenu.net/
http://www.whyweprotest.net/en/
http://www.whyaretheydead.net/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Commission_on_Human_Rights

I studied a little psychology and I find it quite intriguing. In the 90′s, there was a boom in the commonality of psychotropic drugs. Maybe too many people were prescribed medications when some simple cognitive behavior therapy (or CBT) could have done the trick. What’s that? They don’t believe in therapy either? Oh, yeah, they call it auditing. Also, they intentionally conceal the fact that they don’t like any drugs, whether for headaches, seizures, AIDS. Anything.

A friend of mine who used to be in this “church” for many years had to carry around a card that said she was prone to seizures, so call these people — and don’t let anyone else help. All this because the church would not let her take the medication prescribed by her doctor.

It’s not only an insult to psychological professionals, but science in general. Here’s a vid on CCHR:

And all this because L Ron Hubbard was a nutjob. Even his wife said so.

EDIT: The videos are no longer available — at least from that user. Surprise, surprise!

SHARE MORE

The word science comes from the Latin “scientia,” meaning knowledge.

How do we define science? According to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, the definition of science is “knowledge attained through study or practice,” or “knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world.”

What does that really mean? Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge. This system uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain natural phenomena. The term science also refers to the organized body of knowledge people have gained using that system. Less formally, the word science often describes any systematic field of study or the knowledge gained from it.

What is the purpose of science? Perhaps the most general description is that the purpose of science is to produce useful models of reality.

We can also check Wikipedia, but since its definition would basically repeat the previous chunk of text, I will fast forward to the scientific method section:

The scientific method seeks to explain the events of nature in a reproducible way, and to use these reproductions to make useful predictions. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural events under controlled conditions. It provides an objective process to find solutions to problems in a number of scientific and technological fields.

Often scientists have a preference for one outcome over another, and scientists are conscientious that it is important that this preference does not bias their interpretation. A strict following of the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of a scientist’s bias on the outcome of an experiment. This can be achieved by correct experimental design, and a thorough peer review of the experimental results as well as conclusions of a study.

There is a little something called the scientific method that science itself is based on. Science would not and could not exist or even function without it. When something repeatedly fails the scientific method, its tossed out as bad science for a reason. Most scientists would have nothing to gain by banning together to “expel” a particular point of view for any reason other than it clearly fails the scientific method… not once and not twice, but repeatedly by different people all over the world. Moreover, if it fails the scientific method repeatedly, then obviously it is not “science”.

Turning it to the creationism debate: Creationism directly implies you must accept an entire religious doctrine in addition to a simple theory on the origin of life. Science makes no claims on what your beliefs may or may not be outside the realm of what is proven in a particular instance. Nor does science ever assume or assert anything other that what has been proved through the scientific method. To clarify, if one accepts the truths of evolution yet makes room that some godly power helped the process along, at least one is not denying what has been tested and retested by the scientific method. He/she can still believe anything outside the realm of what can be proven; those beliefs generally do not defy science. Whether god exists or doesn’t, it cannot be proved or disproved. However, evolution has only been understood more and more due to the scientific method. On a side note: Evolution isn’t an ‘atheist’ theory, it’s a scientific one. Many Christians and most Jews (in addition to followers of other religions and philosophical ways of life) accept evolution.

I do not “believe” in science (or evolution), I understand it. I know it. I live it. I am it. That is science, simply put. The truth discovered over years of studying and testing.

In my humble opinion, for someone to teach or want creationism taught in not just any ol’ school course (philosophy, religion, or any other class that would seem appropriate) but specifically science class is purely baffling. First, one must understand what the term science means and what it stands for. If one believes in the strict interpretation of the biblical creationism story, you have every right, but its your religion or even personal philosophy. Believe as you like, but please don’t call it science.

SHARE MORE