<< AMIS FAMILY SECURE ~ MAIN ~ SMOKING CEREMONY CONDEMNED >>
EMISSIONS DOWN, BEARS DROWN
Things are getting better:
Since 1970, carbon monoxide emissions in the U.S. are down 55%, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Particulate emissions are down nearly 80% and sulfur dioxide emissions have been reduced by half. Lead emissions have declined more than 98%.
But somehow this is only making things worse, as the NY Times reports:
Polar bears are drowning; an American city is underwater; ice sheets are crumbling ... the rate of warming from the 1970’s until now has been three times the average rate of warming since 1900. Seas have risen about six to eight inches globally over the last century and the rate of rise has increased in the last decade.
I blame this on decreased carbon monoxide, particulate, sulfur dioxide, and lead emissions. For the sake of all the drowning polar bears, let’s get those pollutants up!
Speaking of breathtakingly dishonest, where the hell did they get this?
Seas have risen about six to eight inches globally over the last century and the rate of rise has increased in the last decade.
Six to eight inches? WTF? Not even the most alarmist sky-is-falling Gaia-pleading loons have made that claim. Millimeters, maybe.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 04 23 at 11:30 AM • permalinkSo the ice is melting so fast the bears can’t catch up to the retreating edge? Can’t get a good night’s sleep without getting pitched into the sea? Can’t take a shit in the floes without a jet of icewater in inappropriate places?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 23 at 11:54 AM • permalinkSix to eight inches?
It depends on when you measure the change from. According to the Global Warming-types at the UN, sea levels were falling prior to about 1968. Per their chart, the level fell over 10 cm in 1891, alone. It all depends on where you start your chart from.
Global temperature change is the norm. For example, for three decades, from about 1940-70, temperatures were falling despite an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Likewise, the atmosphere has cooled slightly since 1998. Global temperature change is a far more complex process than merely measuring changes in the amount of carbon dioxide would suggest.
I’ve long considered Global Climate change alarmism as a proxy for those who regard people as a pox upon the earth - such as University of Texas evolutionary ecology Professor Eric Pianka who appears to advocate using Ebola to wipe out 90 percent of the human population.
Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2006 04 23 at 11:58 AM • permalinkThe article’s not that bad, as MSM pieces on this topic go. But the writer really should not have been surprised (twice) to find a time series displaying more variability over the short term than the long term. The Dow, for example, rose at a 164% annual rate last week. I’ve a shrewd hunch we won’t see anything like that number for the entire year.
Posted by Paul Zrimsek on 2006 04 23 at 12:12 PM • permalinkBush prevaricated, polar bears were saturated!
Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 04 23 at 12:25 PM • permalinkThe article starts out reasonably, but morphs into typical environmental disaster alarmism. There are also a few forays into objective territory, where the author cites
global warmingglobal coolingclimate change skeptics. I particularly liked the scanned images of the NYT articles from 1932 and 1956.And, as per typical Mother Gaia™ doctrine, it’s all the fault of people, to wit:
Many scientists say that to avoid a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations, energy efficiency must be increased drastically, and soon. And by midcentury, they add, there must be a complete transformation of energy technology. That may be why some environmentalists try to link today’s weather to tomorrow’s problem. While scientists say they lack firm evidence to connect recent weather to the human influence on climate, environmental campaigners still push the notion.
Emphasis is mine. See the quite slide into alarmism? Energy production (by people) is the cause. Oooooooo, nice slight of hand there!
I don’t disagree that energy production and technology has to be revamped. But that, at most, will reduce environmental change.
But I have to give kudos to the author on one point: The “adapt or die” strategy is seriously discussed. Environmentalists tend to be preservationists, which is a good thing in some regards. But there’s a dark side to this: they are resistant to any change…..even when all the evidence points to the simple fact that the environment thrives on change….and we really can’t stop it. Indeed, we should not.
This disconnect with reality is what is causing the environmental alarmists to squeal with alarm every time someone points out data contradictory to their dogma.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 23 at 12:30 PM • permalinkTrying to actively manage a process (the ecosystem) when you can’t even identify all the variables is like sending the Three Stooges to fix the plumbing in the basement during a posh dinner party…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 23 at 01:02 PM • permalinkI certainly hope that’s not a slight. Paco, Stoop Davy Dave, and I did fix that leak after all. The neocon banquet went off without a hitch.
Of course, we got no credit or thanks naturally.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 23 at 01:19 PM • permalinkNew Orleans was *built* underwater several centuries ago: They just built walls to keep the water out.
Posted by Aaron - Freewill on 2006 04 23 at 01:31 PM • permalinkDave S. — ecomoonbats can only exist under very specific and limited environmental conditions. I think they can’t breed at the current temperatures…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 23 at 01:48 PM • permalinkHow serious can you take the writer of this piece when he repeats the old urban legend of frogs in boiling water?? I mean if I can find this link with one fingered typing then it’s not too much to ask NYT to do more research than the scuttlebutt from the playground?
Posted by Pat Patterson on 2006 04 23 at 02:16 PM • permalink#28: The WWW is publishing gnostic heresy? I’m . . . not altogether surprised.
Yes, this -and similar outlets - do slam Osama and the bad guys. That’s actually one reason I find them endearing: in spite of the hyperbolic and fantastic stories (which, as Dave S. points out, are frequently hilarious), they do tend to strike the right patriotic chords.
Well, that’s the last time I go to that racist rag, the NYT. Everyone there only gives a sh*t about white bears drowning, but will we ever see the headline, “World Ends Tomorrow, Black and Brown Bears Hardest Hit”. I doubt it very much from those racist, bearist, ursa blanca, Ivy League crackers! When will they get a bear of colour on-staff; or is there no room for Jayson Bear at the Times now? B@st@rds.
And is there a difference between 10” and 10cms or 10mms? Who knew!Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 23 at 04:55 PM • permalinkRafe — Man, drowning with that your last sight… you’re a cruel bugger…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 23 at 05:25 PM • permalink“World Ends Tomorrow, Black and Brown Bears Hardest Hit”.
OK, andycanuck…..what about grizzlys? Huh? Huh? ARE YOU A RACIST AS WELL?!?!?!?!?!!?
Please send your response, in writing and notarized, to the editor of the Weekly World News.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 23 at 05:31 PM • permalinkActually, most of the centuries-old portion of New Orleans was built on the above-sea-level banks of the Mississippi, and thus mostly escaped the flood when the levees broke. The areas that were under sea level were built up in the past few decades.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 04 23 at 06:17 PM • permalinkBut nobody likes Grizzlies—they’re the
illegal aliensundocumented ursines of the natural world. Salmon-killing sods.Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 23 at 06:48 PM • permalinkSydney’s Parisian-style contribution to the global fight against climate change
Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 04 23 at 07:45 PM • permalinkDon’t confuse grizzlies with those cod-eating S.O.B. seals, Geoff!
Seriously, however, we do salmon farm on both east and west coasts and the enviros are all against it! Fears of mixing the genes of wild and escaped (GE?) farmed salmon; and diseases from the farmed salmon affecting the wild ones are their reasons. While, for some reason, Native overfishing, including when it’s out of season for everyone else, is never raised by them as a possible factor in dwindling wild stocks in B.C.‘s rivers.
And while the enviros aren’t exactly turning a blind-eye to it, they downplay the Asian connection to the illegal trade in (black) bear parts (mainly gall bladders and the paws, I believe) used in Oriental folk medicines. We wouldn’t want to step on any multicultural
pawstoes.Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 23 at 08:08 PM • permalinkAdd 6 to 8 inches to your sea level NOW!!! Millions of dissatisfied climate change experts can’t be wrong!
Sounds like an advertisement in the Weekly World News…...
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 23 at 08:11 PM • permalinkGlobal temperature change is the norm. For example, for three decades, from about 1940-70, temperatures were falling despite an increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Which was exactly when we were letting off nukes like bungers on cracker night- there’s the answer, instant global cooling, and a very compliant (or vaporised) goat pilot population.
How could anyone argue against that?
Something weird is happening at my place.
Last night the bathtub mysteriously rose about 30cm before my kids bathed and then just as mysteriously evaporated into thin air after they were dried and dressed.
From all reliable accounts, this did not happen 40 years ago when mysteriously there was not even a house where mine is now.
Global warming in action. No-one is safe, especially polar bears who can’t swim.
Posted by The (WHMECDM) President on 2006 04 23 at 09:00 PM • permalinkThere was a quite excellent radio program last week, on the BBC of all places, about scientists who believe that man-made climate change is real but is being exaggerated:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/battleforinfluence
Posted by TokenModerateGuy on 2006 04 23 at 09:57 PM • permalink#62
Didn’t observe that one, but if the Simpsons has taught me anything, being an antipodean I would say it was swirling in the clockwise direction.
And in Rand McNally people wear hats as shoes, and hamburgers eat people.
Such a crazy hemisphere could also have usually proficient swimmers such as polar bears suddenly incapable of paddling to safety.
Posted by The (WHMECDM) President on 2006 04 23 at 10:10 PM • permalinkslightly off topic
I wonder what Leunig / Adams et al will write this year about ANZAC day.
its about that time again and I’m sure there all dusting off their AustraliaHate files
Posted by knuckleheadwatch on 2006 04 23 at 10:20 PM • permalinkIf polar bears are suddenly unable to swim, it must be due to the lack of good recreational programs for polar bear youth. With a sufficiently large government grant, I will be opening a swimming program at the YMCA for underprivileged bears. Not just white polar bears, mind you, considering the above discussion, but open to all bear cultures.
Can’t have them in the regular swim class you know. There’s always that problem of one student eating the other.I wonder what will happen during the climate change to that relative of the polar bears that live in Oz, known as Drop Bears. They attack bush walkers by falling on them from the tree. Will they start sneaking up on bathers/swimmers from the water on the new coast lines?
Posted by The Big Fish on 2006 04 23 at 10:25 PM • permalink#57- Here’s a formation of the buggers in brocade form; see also sand goblins.
Another benefit of this action would be to create a large glut of glass, thus saving all the nasty plastic currently used to package and dispense beverages.
(Be a good time to buy shares in drink companies as well- if you’re anywhere near where the “atmospheric tests” are conducted, you’re going to be mighty thirsty.
Since this is a climate change thread.
Reports have typhoon Monica heading towards Darwin, maybe Tuesday.
I would usually make some smart Lewinsky comment but the reports show this as worse than Katrina or Rita already, and gettng worse as time passes.
Yikes! Hope it scrubs a great deal of that strength over land before it gets to Darwin.
Will try to keep up with this but reporting on this is scarce to say the least. Good luck!
It’s when the koala bears start drowning they will get my attention.
Hell, don’t worry about the koalas… when the yetis start drowning, we got troubles…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 23 at 11:28 PM • permalinkThat plus a range of accessories; while stalking most examples of the species represents no challenge, I think it would be rather a wheeze to hunt this sub-species, preferably with a flamethrower-equipped tracked vehicle.
Well nuclear power’s not the answer according to a contributer to Crickey who cites “the respected academic and advocate Dr Helen Caldicott” article in the Age. She is also apparently the President of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute in Washington. Aren’t you guys fortunate to such an objective and unbiased Australian helping to formulate your nuclear policy?
She’s also not very impressed with Australia’s involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan, certainly Vietnam (as I recall from years ago), most likely Korea, probably WW2, WW1, the Boer War, Sudan and the Maori wars. Probably won’t be an attendee at any of tomorrow’s ANZAC day marches. But she does have some grudging admiration for Karl Rove. Dated article, but well worth a read and a laugh if you haven’t seen it before.
Posted by Whale Spinor on 2006 04 24 at 12:26 AM • permalink#78 WS I have never heard of the respected academic and advocate Dr Helen Caldicott, but there is an anti-nuke moonbat of the same name.
Small world!
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 24 at 12:42 AM • permalinkMaybe we should deploy these drop-bears against the tree-bound parasitic sub-phylum?
Even Bob Brown can’t whine about using an eco-vector to control feral pests.
It occurs to me that there is a bright side to bears drowning.
Think of all the bear rugs we can make!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 24 at 01:12 AM • permalink#82- It’s just you.
(ps- let me know what you’re on, and where I can score some; must be wikked if it makes Moanica Retard look ok and sound reasoned- sort of a combo beer goggles and iPod full of Rummy podcasts).
Australian seals will eat salmon if given half a chance.
They will even eat salmon farmers.
Thanks for the link to the “your” ABC story, Geoff. I would eat salmon farmers too, but I’m too afraid that I’ll choke on a bone, just like with seal flippers. (I mean the animal appendage, not a short-order cook in Newfoundland & Labrador.)
And it just struck me, how do polar bears survive in Australian zoos—shouldn’t it be too hot for them virtually all-year long even if their pools are cooled? And does cooling zoo enclosures for polar bears and penguins etc. add to global warming through increased energy use? Maybe as part of a YMCA programme we could get zoo-bound Aussie polar bears and penguins on oversize hamster treadmills to power generators to keep the enclosures cooled.
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 24 at 01:39 AM • permalinkIs this climate change related too? And Alberta doesn’t have any nuke power plants, so it must be coming in from Ontario or over the North Pole from Russia. Maybe “Doctor” Caldicott can investigate?
http://tinyurl.com/qpj57Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 24 at 01:49 AM • permalinkThey’re all shitfaced on Bundy Rum and don’t notice the heat.
When they die of cirrohsis or alcoholic poisoning, we just reef another drowning one out of the bycatch from a trawler- the kiddies love them, and they’re usually too pissed to be able to catch and eat any of the adorable little pixies.
All I can say is I had absolutely nothing to do with this. I’m outraged! I have tried to keep up the nocturnal emmissions, but damnit! It’s harder the older a man gets, y’know? But I will keep going to sleep with the porn movie still playing on the DVD player…Huh? Oh…carbon monoxide emissions…oh, sorry.
Boy is my face red.
#90,91- you lucky, lucky bastards.
It’s been hot enough to boil a monkey’s bum up here, and the rotten heat and humidity is showing no sign of buggering off despite it being bloody winter in less than six weeks.
Seeing as there’s also a drought in SE Queensland, I’ve come up with an innovative way of fixing both problems- if we air-conditioned the entire region, the humidity extracted from the sodden air would fill every dam and weir for mile around, as well as having enough left over to supply daily wet t-shirt contests, while ridding the area of its rotten sub-tropical climate.
We’ve got shitloads of coal, so running the necessary power stations would be a doddle.
Who says you can’t do anything about climate change?
O/T (Yes I know 2 in quick succession I am sorry oh great administratrix)
John Howard on the topic of Osama Bin Laden.
“Well, I’d like to see him either in captivity or deceased of course,”
Who said politicians avoid giving straight answers.
Speaking of the drought, I remember hearing something recently about Beijing intending to clean up the urban environment by “seeding” rainclouds in the sky which would cleanse the city streets of grime (or something like that) for weeks ahead of the 2008 Olympic Games. Does anybody know if this is possible, or is it just Chinese whispers?
#86 andycanuck
“How do polarbears survive in Australian zoos ...?”
Thank you andy. I feel like I’ve been waiting all my life for that question.
Polarbears are kept in only one place in Australia - Sea World on the Gold Coast in Queensland.(Where I live)
And this is how they survive.
I must modestly claim to have had a small role in bringing polarbears to Australia. A friend of mine was a senior exec at Sea World etc. About 8 or 9 years ago they were debating whether to make the huge investment of putting in the display. My friend was wavering. Over dinner I asked the same question as you did and was answered in considerable detail. I encouraged the investment. “Of course I would go to Sea World to see polarbears” I said. The rest as they say is history.
Funny thing though. I never did go to see the polarbears. No matter. The bears are still their most popular attraction now.
This is getting a little boring. No trolls.
Where did all the
flowerstrolls go?
Long time passing..(with apologies to some mob of smelly 1960s hippies)Have they stopped breeding in the sewers and fever swamps of the left? lemme see…
...
...
Nope, Larvateus Prodeo is still stuffed to the rafters with lefty dingbats. A friend of mine called that site “The Anal Rodeo”, which is funny, but kinda weird.Maybe we should not have been so nasty to ‘em?
Naaah.
MarkL
Canberra#96- they use silver nitrate, with varying degrees of success- it was used here in the ‘70s but went out of favour. The ski resorts in NSW wanted to do it to increase snowfalls, but of course the enviropests kicked up a ruckus; you have to have cumulo-nimbus to seed in the first place, they’re the only cloud type with sufficient moisture concentration.
All it does is make the rain form and drop before it normally would- probably not a bad idea as far as SE Qld goes, as we get plenty of cloud but it doesn’t rain until it’s out to sea.
Donations to the tortured Chinese bears (bile catheters in situ etc) welcome to the Save the Bears foundation started in Austraya.A lady was on a tour overseas and saw some bears in cages. When she went to see if they were being humanely looked after, a female bear reached out and touched her very gently on the shoulder,through the bars.(kiddies do NOT try this at home.)t shirts available,bears rescued,relocated and rehabilitated.
Funny, the yanks apparently lowered their emissions massively through the 70’s and 80’s. But the Kyoto bollocks wants “Year zero” to begin now?
Hmmm, Cant see which economy should cop the shaft the most then?Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 04 24 at 07:59 AM • permalinkI think the absence of trolls is caused by their thinking green and throwing away all their power using computers. They’re all sitting at home now with their keyboards “plugged in” to a log and a mirror…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 24 at 10:02 AM • permalinkFossicking. Woo-hoo!
Neat link, Geoff, I’ve even bookmarked it to send to an Aussie china. (I gave his daughter a Toronto Maple Leafs
professionalice hockeygolfsports team team mascot doll of Carlton the [polar] Bear, so they can see about going one day to let her see Carlton’s relatives.) I wish my place was that nice as bringing down slabs of rock from the Near North for landscaping is a new trend here.And the Blair Theory of Inverse Global Warming is at work again. After I joined this thread the weather dropped from sunny and 17°C to rainy and 11°C with overnight lows in the single digits so we’ve had to turn the heat back on. In April. I hope it’s better by July.
And if you’d like to start your own polar bear site, I’m sure I can contact some Natives to pick you up a few and have the Chinese gangs ship them to you hidden in a shipload of smuggled cigarettes. They’re sure to have a large freezer room on the ship to accommodate them. ;^)
And I’ve seen adverts here for the bear lady’s programme, crash, or a similar one; they’re fronted by the actor from Due South, who played the RCMP constable in Chicago, along with the WWF being involved. (Those professional athletes do so much good work outside of the ring.)
Posted by andycanuck on 2006 04 24 at 10:32 AM • permalink56 Habib
there’s the answer, instant global cooling, and a very compliant (or vaporised) goat pilot population.
How could anyone argue against that?Argue against it? I can’t even understand it! What’s a “goat pilot population”? Should I be taking this personally or what?
57 Crapcakes! Even Paco doesn’t know, and he’s the first guy I was gonna ask!
68 Now I’m more confused than before! Either goat pilots are medieval tapestry characters or seig-heiling beret-wearing fucktards. None of those latter chaps, to be frank, looked bright enough to pilot a goat all the way out of the harbor, let alone navigate it to anyplace.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 24 at 11:35 AM • permalink#17—Seriously, isn’t quoting the NYT on global warming kind of like quoting the National Enquirer on extra-terrestrials or bat-faced infants?
Well of course it is. Everyone knows that Weekly World News is the authoritative source for EBE and bat-faced infants news.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 04 24 at 12:04 PM • permalinkLOL, ushie—I stopped reading one comment too soon.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 04 24 at 12:06 PM • permalinkAre polar bears drowning because melting ice floes take them ever farther from food sources or is it perhaps a nefarious plot perpetrated by desperate enviros on a populace unmoved by
global warmingglobal coolingclimate change concerns? Polar bears to be considered for threatened species list:If the polar bear is declared a threatened species, it would be the first mammal deemed in danger of extinction because of global warming. A listing could force the government to adopt curbs on carbon dioxide, the primary greenhouse gas linked to rising temperatures in the atmosphere and ocean.
snip
Three environmental groups—Greenpeace, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Natural Resources Defense Council—filed a lawsuit in December, charging that the Fish and Wildlife Service had failed to rule on their petition asking the agency to start the review.
In deciding to review, agency officials ruled that the petition presented substantial scientific information indicating that listing the polar bear may be warranted.
For 60 days, the agency will take comments on effects of climate and sea ice change as well as on the effects of oil and gas development, hunting, poaching and contaminants on the bears.
“Our petition to list the polar bear as a threatened species is based on the overwhelming evidence that global warming threatens the bear with extinction,’’ said attorney Andrew Wetzler, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s endangered species project.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 04 24 at 12:43 PM • permalinkHiya, loadedog!!! Got any sensible comments for the thread?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 24 at 03:58 PM • permalink#113- here’s a valuable guide to the culture of goat pilots, and their aims for the future (provided they have one, what with all that strontium 90 floating about).
I am surprised at the lack of imagination demonstrated by those ignorant of the origins of “goat pilots”
I mean, really, what else is one to hang onto while….
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 04 24 at 08:02 PM • permalink#119 Well, this is the only Og I could find. I really think the guy meant “loaded dog”, but left out a ‘d’. I leave it you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury: does the fellow put you more in mind of a King of the Ammonites, or a dog who got into a vat of home brew?
#122 exclusive! pic of og in melbourne’s very own royal arcade, also home to awesome purveyor of hand made chocolates koko black (seriously to die for)
og & magog26 McEnroe
ecomoonbats can only exist under very specific and limited environmental conditions. I think they can’t breed at the current temperatures…
You sure? I thought ambient light was the problem. They have trouble finding breeding partners, because they’re too visible, whereas if it were much darker and foggier, they’d have a better chance. There’s ample photographic evidence in support of this theory, but I’m too squeamish to link to it.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 09:49 AM • permalink120 Habib
here’s a valuable guide to the culture of goat pilots
That’s their culture? And they “pilot” these goats? Tell ya what, maybe they can pilot along just fine, on a clear day, with no traffic around, and with the autopilot set right, but frankly, from what I see here, I wouldn’t trust them to handle any take-offs, let alone any landings, no. Looks like a waste of flight-school tuition to me, is alls I’m sane.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 10:11 AM • permalinkSome have hypothesized that Og was perhaps as tall as 12 feet, allowing an extra foot for clearance, but that conclusion is based solely on the length of the man’s bedstead. Some sources say Og was taller than the wall Kotel. “Now, Moses was ten amot (15 feet) tall. He took a hammer ten amot long, jumped up ten amot and swung the hammer at Og’s ankles, killing him.”
So did the idea of “biblical inerrancy” spring up amongst people who’d never read this exciting book?, or from mischeivous people who had read it, but had also noticed that hardly anyone else had?
More better: is there a counterpart to this story in the koran?, or does this story begin and end too early in history to get incorporated into that competing holy-and-infallible documentation of God’s word?
More importantly, is it really legitimate to leave a question mark in mid-compound-sentence?, ahead of a comma, and then proceed to a second question?
And is this coffee stronger than usual today, or what?Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 10:26 AM • permalinkNo no no, this was the famous Og, King of the Amorites:
Og is first mentioned in the book of Deuteronomy, specifically the 1st and 3rd chapters. He was an Amorite, not unlike his neighbor Sihon of Heshbon, of whom Moses had previously conquered at the battle of Jahaz. ... His Capitol at Ashtaroth was also a worship center to the fertility goddess, and this city is probably modern Tell Ashareh an existing 70-foot mound.
Hey! It turns out there IS a koranic reference to him, too:
Og, the giant of the Amorites, is equally considered a folk legend, around whom gathered many Jewish legends: according to some traditions he lived to be 3,000 years and strolled behind Noah’s ark during the Deluge. In Islamic lore he is referred to as ‘Uj ibn ‘Unk, meaning Og of the Neck, evidently one of the Jabbarun (giants) mentioned in the Qur’an (sura v.25).
I wonder if little old Proud2b@Muslimah believes in Og. Or the Noachian Flood, for that matter.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 02:34 PM • permalinkAnd Ushie? Wouldn’t you be the authority figure to whom I should refer my question about the question marks and the commas?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 02:37 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
“An American city is underwater”?
Assuming they are talking about New Orleans, that is breathtakingly dishonest. They built the city in a swamp, for crying out loud!