Everything Evolves

                Why are so many people against evolution? One could say that it is but the small minded majorities who still don’t believe that it is true but a good share of them have to be intelligent enough to think it through for themselves, right? I am one who believes that IQ is no indication of intelligence but merely a number expressed by academics in order to score tail at democratic fundraisers. No, I believe everyone is capable of understanding the wonders of life and all it has to offer in the scientific sense. Some are smarter at certain things than others. I can write a twenty page essay that is coherent and meaningful in less than thirty minutes but give me an Alan wrench and some Duck Tape then expect me to fashion an air conditioning unit out of spare parts and I am completely left in the dark. Surely everyone must agree on one thing, things change.

                I believe that the intellect in all of us has at one point or another has rejected the possibility of evolution at some point or another because it contradicted what is supposed to be the one basic truth, that the Holy Bible and all of its fantastical stories must have happened. To reject this would be at odds with a creator who may or may not exist. Simply betting the odds in this case won’t necessarily take away from life’s glories but it sure does make for a pretty inclusive existence. Then again, if we’re wrong then what’s the harm? We’d be dead anyways. But as the world has progressed and evidence has mounted has there ever been a better time than now to reconsider that the bible may have been wrong or at least interpreted a little too literally?

                Even high ranking officials at the Vatican lost their battle with science and conceded that life had to have evolved over time instead of one instance of creation. Although to be fair they still keep the faith that God had a hand in it. But to me I would like to think a creator would try to avoid or at least fix mistakes in the gene code that allowed for such things as gluttony and hatred. Even the fact that a man’s testes has a chord that goes from them, around the midsection and then back into the prostate should be a concern over why didn’t a better plan just be for them to go from the testes to the prostate in a more direct route? As much as I would like to, I will not make this a paper on atheism, although that would be an interesting topic for another discussion, I would like to instead pronounce my enthusiasm for the facts and theories of evolution as an unbiased observer.

                (If I came off as being anti-God please forgive me, I am just an intellectual asshole who has nothing better to do with his time than to pick on the resurrection of Christ.)

                First off let me explain the difference between a theory and a scientific theory. A theory in the contemporary sense is an educated guess on how things work. A scientific theory uses evidence to make an informed hypothesis (also an educated guess, just wordier) meaning that if you had a fossil record that seemed to transition from one thing to another you would use a theory to test your hypothesis, such as using the now standard DNA model of detection. We first saw this theory arise when Darwin conducted his biological studies and found that some newly discovered fossils looked different but slightly less so than current living species. As the century progressed we used his theory model to conduct real time experiments on sexual selection (aka: breeding for certain traits in dogs or racing horses) to and natural selection (putting a group of bacteria in a jar with finite amount of food and saw which strands strived to reproduce over their lesser equipped counterparts). It is to say, that a lot of work goes into gathering facts before a scientific theory can be accepted as truth. And we have the facts for evolution.

                One of the worst things about history deniers to me is that they say there is no proof, that the world’s scientific community is lying to cover up God’s work. My question to them would be how can a million scientist be covering up something without having to first devote their lives to such a grandiose lie? Why on Earth would somebody spend their days pursuing something they didn’t believe in just to spite others who have no direct relation to them? It’s a waste of time and energy, and, just as natural selection has taught us, this would be quickly weeded out of society seeing as it is of no good to the propagation to the greater good.

                But what these people fail to realize is that it has probable saved their lives and made them better to boot at least a million times over by now. If we never had the theory of evolution then we’d be puzzled as to why white lab mice have almost identical immune systems as we do or even why a chimp would act so human. With it though we can see where certain things stack up with our DNA code and then use the similarities in order to produce medicines and treatments that actually work at bettering ourselves. Knowing that a mouse carries the same gene for depression has helped us make prescriptions for anti-depressants. Knowing whether or not bacteria strive under certain conditions due to certain genetic conditions will either help us or hurt us has formed the basis for anti-bacterial and pro-biotic medicines.

                In fact genetics simply would not even work as a science without our understanding of evolution. It is the basis and concept for everything in biology. It is a thing that has stood the test of time and very critical and analytical minds of the past century.

                The idea to me that nothing is simple makes me want to know more about how things work. Doesn’t it you? Saying that a rainbow appears out of nowhere during a rain shower does nothing for me because there is nothing to explore about it. But saying that it is a product of the prism effect of rain drops in proportion to sunlight makes me think that there is more going on in the world. The fact that everything comes from something, and that something comes from something, that comes from something we have yet to discover makes me anticipate the day that we discover it. If only to then turn and try to find out where that something in fact came from.

                Evolution is seen in everything we do. From us divulging from single non-organic molecules into self-replicating non organic molecules to organic and so on, to the fact that technology (in principle) becomes twice as fast and effective every two years is just the start. Why not think of our solar system as having evolved, and why not with the idea of natural selection? The elements were forged in the first stars (which came together from gravity and hydrogen) and through nuclear fusion became all the elements that we know of and then exploding, which released those elements which in turn are seemingly randomly selected to form new stars and now life giving element rich planets? Without those first stars we would not have oxygen or carbon, the two things necessary for us to exist in the first place. And when our star dies it will release more of those same elements and become new stars and planets (Okay so our sun may not go out in an explosion but the birth of new planets and stars are as inevitable as you having to eat something at least some of the time to keep your body going.)

                Evolution is everywhere. We have the facts, and we use those facts to form theories. To me a world without science would be a never ending rut of plague and disease and disaster. Why wait for a God to cure your cancer when you can go to a hospital and receive treatment? To do so is sound and we rarely think of it in this day and age. But there was a time when going to the doctor meant death by contamination and blood-letting to cure your cold. Medical practices have too evolved over time. Evolution is an unavoidable part of life.

                The next time you see a pretty flower, think not that it was just made, but think of it as a wonder of biology that took millions of years of trial and error to become so beautiful and complex. Wouldn’t that be more fulfilling in the end? I think so. And I hope that you will too someday.

Evolution of our wangs.

Did you know that the gene that controls toe size also controls penis size as well?

It must be true! Learn more about the elusive HOX gene here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hox_gene

Let me start this off by saying that I’d like to think of myself as a connoisseur of the male genitalia. Small, medium, large, they’re all good! Nice and cut or uncut, long or short. I don’t know how I would live without my friend the penis. I’m sure many of you even have one of your own, and for those who don’t I’m sure you enjoy them just as much as we enjoy them ourselves.

I mean, they’re great! They don’t cause men to cramp up in the middle of the month and bleed out like a deer that’s been shot. Its only purpose is to tinkle and make sex just awesome. Seriously, you should try it sometime!

As amazing as this male organ is does anyone ever take the time out to really think about and appreciate the pink torpedo?

You got to think that while it is an awesome tool it serves a basic biological function, which is to deliver sperm to the female’s uterus so it can fertilize any available eggs that may be floating around. Us men are the proud owners of a Y chromosome and very little else.

When you compare our penis sizes with that of any other primate you find that we are definitely in the lead here. A chimp’s dick only measures about three inches. Same goes for the mighty gorilla, which makes him way out of proportion! We humans average at about 5.5”-6” down in the nether regions and that is the biggest non boned package in the animal kingdom.

Did you know that they have to make special condoms for India because the males there are so small?

Yeah… But hey, they made the Kama Sutra right?

What made our penises get so long and thick? There are two theories (I personally think it’s a combination of both) that try to explain our magnificent thingamabobbers. I mean seriously, they’re awesome! Thank you Darwin!!!

Let’s start with the first theory shall we? It’s known that we have the genetic markers for spines on our genitals. Not unlike cats and dogs we used to have spines that came out of the shaft and hooked onto the female. The spines are supposed to clean out competing sperm and make way for your own. In the arms race that is evolution however it appeared that the longer and thicker the penis was the better chance you would have of fathering a young’n. You see the longer and thicker it was the more ease in which it scooped out the sloppy seconds out of the vagina!

Since we don’t have those anymore we now have a mushroom capped gland which does pretty much the same thing.  An evolutionary psychologist by the name of Gordon Gallup devised an experiment to test this theory.

For off he bought two dildos and then another one but it didn’t any top to it (it was all shaft). He got some realistic rubber vaginas and implanted a substance resembling sperm into the cavities (from what I heard it was just water and flour) and put the penises into them and mimicked a few minutes of sexual intercourse. After they were done they found that the two normal dildos scooped out nearly 91% of the simulated sperm while the headless control only brought out a meager 35%. So with this there seems to be some logic for the argument that bigger penises mean more reproductive success.

Plus you got to think practically too. A longer, thicker penis would displace a lot more semen closer into the uterus than a smaller one. Sorry fellas, size matters. At least when it comes to trying to get your best friend’s spooge out of your girl.

How did we lose our spines you ask? That’s where the second theory comes into play. There are three types of selection for evolution to thrive:

Natural selection – Nature takes its course and does what she does just to see what comes out.

Selective breeding – This is when you purposefully mate a species until something new comes along.

Sexual selection – Generally the female picks the man she wants. This is true in almost all the species of anything on this planet that reproduces by sex.

So if you were a female back in those cave days and you had two suitors wanting to have sex with you. Which one would you choose? The one with the spines or the one who would hurt less. I think that after a few hundred thousand to a million years the spines were phased out of the gene pool. This allowed for more competition since sex does feel great and it started the ball rolling for mass distribution of our kind across the planet.

After sex was made readily available for the first time (girls no longer had carotene scraping their vagina walls) we just had at it!

The idea behind the second theory is that a bigger penis just looks more attractive to the opposite sex. Just like a peacock would show off his feathers, it was impressive to see something bigger than normal so it was more enticing to mate with that individual.

A bigger thing also stimulates the vagina more, which makes it attractive to prospective females.

After we started wearing clothes this probably put somewhat of a damper on the progress by repressing our urges and curiosity.

Sex was made to feel great because without it we would die off. Of course it’s going to be one of the best feelings aside from heroin that you’ll ever feel.

Just remember fellas. Sometimes there’s a thing as too big!

Reference: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=secrets-of-the-phallus

God is totally a contradiction and the bible doesn’t help matters much: Part one

I recently got into a bout of fisticuffs over a discussion that had been brought up. I am not normally confrontational unless it has to do with knowledge and someone not having the logic to receive it properly. Case in point I was talking to a fellow one night stand (a wonderful man addicted to meth and who claimed to have an IQ higher than myself) and he told me that he had faith in the bible because it was pure truth. Now me being high at the time probably didn’t help my standing much but I did have an absurd amount of energy to pursue this statement.

I asked him how did he see it as pure truth when the meaning keeps changing with our own society’s moral zeitgeist? He claimed that the bible as we know it now is the true interpretation, which I countered with the idea that how could the previous ones been wrong when that was their truth? We’re not talking about this book as if it’s all fact here.

Wait… Yes he was? According to him Noah’s flood happened (despite the fact that God ordered Noah to sacrifice all the animals on the arc right after reaching land) and Sodom and Gomorrah  was actually visited by hell stone.

As frustrating as this is it’s even more astounding that many people in the USA think this way who aren’t all smacked out on crystal. I could easily take this man’s attitude as someone who is coming down and needs an imaginary friend but there are plenty of sober people who get defensive when you ask why was it necessary for Jesus to die on the cross when God is super magical and could of just saved us without killing himself in the process?

I suppose I have the heart of a scientist because I want to know how things work. I believe that by finding out these things we can make it better for the rest of us. This man however has the old style thought (from scripture) that we should not meddle with God’s work. I brought up the fact that Galileo was tortured by the church for saying that we revolved around the sun. He told me that we need not have known that to live a happy live. I had to correct him by saying that without that special man then we would either not have cell phones now or would have had them later than we already do.

Unnecessary, he said. When asked how he would have called his dealer he scoffed and said that he could quit anytime.

That is beside the point though.

Back to the idea that this book and it’s subject is infallible we have to examine a few key points of what it is to be all knowing and perfect.

1: God knows the future yet we have free will – This one plagued me since I was about ten years old. I can never get a good answer from anyone about this one. Apparently God gave us a free will so that we could love him without ever being forced to. God wants us to love him because we do instead of it being his will.

God also knows what lies in store for us.

Wait a bit? If he already knows that we are going to be bad then why allow us to go that way? Isn’t he supposed to be all loving and all knowing? Where do you figure that we are born with his love when he knows even before conception that we are going to hell? Doesn’t that imply something of a thought that we are born destined for suffering and he is the one who created us?

Even the whole concept of hell brings us to question his love. By simply allowing Satan to exist (I’ve been told that he made him but did not know he was going to be bad, yet he knows the future) he is punishing people for things they did not know was even a sin yet. There is no other explanation for Satan other than he wants someone to argue with, at our expense.

Does this sound logical? He wants us all to go to heaven yet he demands that we repent verbally (sometimes psychically) to him. Would God really need our approval if he was perfect? Wouldn’t his self-esteem be inhuman to begin with? Apparently not.

This brings me to another contradiction that boggles my mind to no end.

2: God is not human – Being God should set him to a higher standard than we as humans could ever achieve, yet he is angry most of the time, sad others, and just completely irrational the rest of the time. A good example would be Noah’s flood (I swear I have more examples but this is just one of the more appalling stories when you think of it) because he lays waste to all of humanity and animals sans what is on that boat.

God doesn’t make mistakes yet he tells humanity (a small family which we are to believe repopulated the Earth within the span of a few hundred years) that he would never again flood the Earth in fury. If he has to make a statement like that would it mean that he felt bad about what he did? When we feel bad it’s because we know we did something wrong. How could God of been wrong if he is perfect?

Everything in the bible seems to point to the fact that God appears to be learning from his mistakes. Learning anything means you are far from perfect. Everything has a learning curve whether or not it’s alive.

Take physics for example. The universe after the big bang was chaotic but with time it fell into place. I know this isn’t exactly learning but I believe that in the sense that it was trial and error for many, many eons until the things fit is part of what I’m saying. I just like romanticizing words so get over it.

But that brings me to another point entirely

3: If God is not human, then why do we think of him as having human characteristics? – I know that one may argue that we are made in his image and all, but that would still not make much sense if you wanted to believe he was beyond all of our petty emotions. More than once I was told that he has a plan and that he is understanding and ya-da-da. If he was then why did he start so many wars in the bible? You don’t start a fight unless you are mad. Again I come back to the thought that it is impossible to get truly angry at another village if you knew when creating them that you would want to rip their heads off in a little while.

The only way I can view God at all is that I think of him as a scientist. He by nature cannot be simple, what simpleton can set the laws of gravity up and give us a nervous system that works well? No, he has to be constantly testing the waters to see what works. That is the only way his actions can even start to make sense to us. Again this nullifies his perfectness.

But the bible tells us to try and not understand him. This is a contradiction because many of the books in that thing tell us to do exactly that. It constantly mentions his emotions in order for us to think his actions were justified.

I think the big giveaway about heaven is the fact that when we go we should be beyond our humanly wants and needs. Then why is it appealing to us Earthlings in the first place? Sure the bible says we’ll be happy but the descriptions are very materialistic in nature. Why have streets of gold when that is a human want? Shouldn’t we be beyond that in heaven?

Or is heaven what we want to believe in? I honestly think it’s the latter because the spiritual fulfillment is but a small part of what we know about it. Everyone wants to live forever so why not believe that we do? Better yet, put it in a book that no one would ever question because we are afraid of God getting angry at us. After all, we know that if we make him angry then he could possibly make all of humanity suffer, again which makes sense if you are a drunken mentally handicapped frat boy seeking revenge on anything that moves because your girl broke up with you.

I will give the bible a point for not mentioning that envy is a sin. That didn’t come until the fourth century when a monk decided to make up reasons for us to go to hell. But it’s the fact that we hold onto these additions that makes a nonsensical book even more so. Thou shalt worship no other Gods but God makes it sound like God gets pretty jealous at us looking at other dudes and duddettes. The contradiction here is that he is God, therefore he’s allowed to sin but we aren’t. Should he be setting an example?

Thou shalt not kill is another gem. Never mind that it refers to the fact that when it was written it was meant to be “thou shalt not kill other Jews” but it’s the very cold truth that anyone takes it literally to begin with.

Our morals certainly do not come from God do they? If they did then we’d have been screwed a long time ago. Why do we look at God and the Bible and praise the good parts while totally ignoring the bad? I think that it’s because if we did then we’d be a lot less impressed with God than we want to be. We want him to be perfect and infallible because it makes us feel like something is in control. I believe the basis of fear is the lack of control. And if we feel he has it then we can make sense of the world.

Then again, wouldn’t that be like trying to understand him in a small way?

Ugh… My head hurts.  As I said things that make no sense shouldn’t be viewed as truth. Plus he seems no better than anyone else so why should I look up to him?

We lived millions of years without him, why start now?

Maybe if I take more drugs God will make sense.

Tall people have no feelings

Men, from an evolutionary standpoint, are major sluts. This goes for the entire male population. Not because they exhibit such tendencies but because we (as males) are biologically adept at basically having the forethought to screw anything with a hole.

Women have to be picky over their mates for practical reasons. Such things like the nine month incubation time it takes to foster a healthy baby to the maternal bond that develops even without any sort of knowledge exchange between both mother and child. Most females (if not all of them) feel something for their offspring even if it aborts. This engrained instinct ensures our survival by giving us a natural advocate for growing and being nurtured into successfully reproducing adults. Our advantage over other animals may not be as cut and dry as survival of the fittest but instead it may be the fact that we are raised and trained to be who we are sans genetics.

Other animals such as cats are born then weaned on mother’s milk. Once that period is over then the kitten is on his own. Us however have the advantage of being raised beyond that. This is of course under the idea that the parent(s) are stable both mentally and emotionally enough to pass on their skills and knowledge of the world at least until school age. Why do we ask our parents for advice? I believe it’s because we know that they were sexually successful therefore we look to them for our early examples.

Without going off point I will now focus on the male. By our very nature we are basically peacocks with available sperm. We are very sexually active due to the fact that we have so much competition from other men. Even evolution was in on the joke early on when men had barbed penises just like many other animals in the past. This was to not only inseminate the female with our sperm but to scrape out other dude’s spunk so that we would have a better chance at knocking up the female with our own genetic offspring. The same thing can still be seen as we have large glands at the ends of our penises and some believe that this is a more subtler version of the spined shafts of our ancestors.

Why are some males more successful than others? It has been studied and many scientists have come to the conclusion that females want alpha males as sexual partners but intelligent men as mates. This has been shown in tests looking at females who are on the birth control pill. The pill tricks the female’s body into thinking that it’s pregnant, therefore the need for a strong male to impregnate her is null and she seeks out a smarter and more reliable companion. However sometimes when the two people are wanting to conceive and she goes off of the contraception then she sometimes finds herself less than impressed with her selection. Her mind may say he’s perfect but her body wants somebody who can pass on strong genes and protect her and her child through the rearing years. Which is an anomaly seeing as the male is still prone to wander because of his engrained instincts.

Those who are healthier and more attractive to ovulating females are at an advantage of making more babies. Even with the advent of condoms these men still go for the healthy females in hopes of (at least biologically speaking) getting her pregnant. The male is nomadic in this sense because he is but one of many, he has to stand out in a chance to spread his genetic material around in hopes that he will procreate. Such things that promote female response is basically what we find attractive in modern males. Height, weight, penis size, and other factors.

Height means health and tall people are statistically more successful not only in sex but in the work force as well. We look at a tall fit young man and we are instilled with a sense that he knows what he is doing even though he may not. We naturally gravitate towards these individuals because it is thought that they are the panicle of reproductive success, even if he is a virgin. That’s how deep this goes. Both men and women flock towards these people without their conscious mind reasoning why.

As I said, the taller and more fit an individual the more appealing he is to both sexes. Boys look up to their fathers when they are little because the male is bigger than they are at that point. Being bigger promotes the idea that that person can protect you and be there for you because he seems to know what he is doing, therefore giving off the illusion of success even when it comes to some five year old wanting to follow in the image of his dead beat trailer trash father who beat his biological and non-biological mothers. It is this illusion that sticks with us way into adulthood.

Attractive males are more likely to get a job over someone shorter and less endowed because of this illusion. A taller fitter more handsome male will win over because we think he is more likely to do the job right seeing as he is in good health. I believe this can misfire with persons afflicted with eating disorders. Again it comes back to illusions and what our minds are really after. A sickly thin person may not be healthy but his body gives off the message (as misleading as it can be) that he is healthy and will perform his tasks better than somebody who is shorter, not as strong, and who is heavier, therefore unhealthier than the seemingly fitter individual. We are predetermined to seek out these people on a model of humanity that goes back millions of years.

Back in the day (pre homo erectus) we were hunters and scavengers who just learned how to use nature to our advantage. The taller alpha males (we’ll call them stupid frat boys) were the ones going out and getting the food, while the smarter and less physically intimidating ones were the glue that helped form the ideals of basic human needs beyond food, water, and shelter. A frat boy was unconcerned about the health of one particular female because he had so many to choose from. The nerd’s body still tried to mimic the frat boy because that is in essence inside all of us men to try and be the provider / protector. Ever see a small dog take on a bigger one in a battle of wills? Same thing, but does the small dog ever win? In nature usually not.

In response to this I believe we developed intelligence to find ways for the less physically attractive males to compensate for the features they lacked in order to woo potential mates. We now see these actions in the form of bring a girl flowers, talking to them about their feelings, cuddling, and basically anything you’ve ever done to someone you wanted in order to get laid. You may have felt an emotion behind such actions but the main focus was to bust a nut inside her and pop out a child, making it all but positive that your genes survive.

Males are naturally territorial. We will fight one another over the right to fuck someone, even if it’s just two guys joking with each other in a bar in front of a woman. Tearing each other down and exposing faults in hopes that one male will emerge victorious.

It is a myth that females (and gay males) are not fully driven by outward appearance (which I’ve said can be an illusion) because first looks are the mediator between talking to somebody and ignoring them. It’s in us all and to say that we don’t notice things like that is a lie to one’s self. It’s almost always after the fact that we delve into that person’s psyche for emotional compatibility. After all, once the deed is done then the male really has no tie to the female other than his child, which in nature means little to the male’s fidelity. Animals and humans have evolved our sense of belonging and companionship out of the need to be taken care of beyond the reproductive aspects. We barter and need to love and be loved. But why?

Obviously what’s good for the species is good for the individual. If we take care of someone else then we are helping to preserve our shared DNA. Deep down instinct is still not to the point where it can be shut off. We still gravitate toward the more imposing of persons only to judge character after they’ve spoken or performed an altruistic feat.

All males have the need to reproduce. Tall good looking males are just better at it from that standpoint of outward illusion. The conscious comes after the fact of instinct. Leaving other males behind means nothing in this sense as long as the goal is achieved.

From this idea comes the stupid jock who fucks half the high school and the male model whom girls and guys want to be with without ever knowing the mechanisms behind these urges.

It is good sense to breed with somebody who is fit and healthy and can take care of itself in the long run. Given this all other things that come after the fact is arbitrary, the dick head who never had to develop a full intelligent personality will generally have first picks, leaving those others to use other means to their advantage.

This rule applies to smaller men who are fit as well. Taller ones are just more likely to be jerks due to their size and previous successes as opposed to the smaller ones who develop nasty personalities due to perceived defects.

As intelligent human beings we can get along in a superficial sense, but deep down the fitter males know they can get laid. Making them hunters and promiscuous.

Biologically speaking, tall people have no feelings.

Get your ass in gear people!

Who to believe here? Michael Chricton who is a doctor in medicine or scientists who are doctors in geology, meteorology, biology, and environmental sciences?

Gee... Tough question. I'll give it to Chricton though, his data seems correct when you search for it. Although his book "State Of Fear" was written in 2002-2003 and published in 2004 and there was little proven theory and developed tests to make an more accurate theory back then. Or the fact that most of the strikingly significant global warming trends started in late 2005-2006 doesn't mean that he was full of bullshit. Well it does in retrospect but he was just going by what the majority of scientists at the time made public. And the ones with the most clout were ones funded by big businesses. Tons of new environmental agencies and such have opened up since then and hired their own scientists on the subject.

I know what you are thinking. They are biased to their employer. But weren't the scientists that made the initial confirmations? I know for a fact that we are not due for another ice age for almost 80,000 years because it's been only 20,000 years since the last one and according to geological surveys it happens roughly every 100,000 years. So that theory is horse dung. Just like one way to prove evolution is true is to check the fossils against the strata in which it was discovered, you can check for this shit by not only looking at that but by doing ice surveys in Antarctica (the ice there is up to six miles deep!) by checking plant fossilization records in which you analyze carbon content of the fossil (more snow means less sunlight meaning more carbon and less oxygen from photosynthesis).

I honestly only know about the mounds of scientific data that is accumulating and surpassing the contrary ideology since Katrina and the recent significant warming trends of the past five years.

What am I doing about it? Making it known to take a fucking bus when you need to go downtown (parking sucks anyways and it's so damn expensive!) or using tap water for drinking water (a plastic bottle every time you drink? Shit!) or taking showers that are less than three to five minutes (You're in there to clean yourself, not to fucking jack off!) or not eating fast food (sure they switched to using paper containers... Billions and billions served folks!) using email and switching all bank, insurance, and medical statements to online notifications (who uses the mail anymore for anything other than shipping things? Which by the way, ground is a better way to go seeing as jet fuel is ten times more polluting than standard gasoline) and other ways that I am forgetting about right now... They'll come to me.

I'm not perfect but it's not a bad thing to strive for. I believe that this is a generational thing that will see the most effects when the youth of today are adults and in power. Did you know that nearly sixty to seventy percent of politicians still believe in God and reject climate change because of both money being poured into their campaigns and the fact that they don't believe that God would allow the righteous to suffer on a global scale? (Hello Ted Haggard / Mitt Romney!) The kids being scared today will grow up and kill off these dinosaurs better than any comet could have done. Although if that's what it takes then there are ways to direct those things toward Washington via gravitational pull by specifically designed satellites...

Did you know that global warming isn't just a recent thing? Scientists now estimate that it began nearly two to five thousand years ago when we started cultivating the land. All those trees cut down resulted in massive amounts of carbon dioxide being released into the air. Trees eat that shit so of course when you cut them down and pulp them it's going to release the stuff that hasn't been formed into oxygen (Which by the way, was a poisonous gas to most life forms three billion years ago, resulting in the first mass extinction scientists now theorize. Although albeit it was all mostly bacteria and single celled or mono celled organisms or free floating RNA / DNA. The more you know) In fact they estimate that this released tons more carbon than all the cars in the world combined at any given time. I say this because it's relative to the time we started cutting them down to the time we started industrialization.

If your only info comes from celebrities and An Inconvenient Truth then you aren't getting the whole picture. Google Steven Schneider or Panel For Climate Change (something like that) and you'll not only get some good info, but links to more good info.

It's fucking stupid to think we can change anything in our lifetime (unless micro technology and medicine allow us to be immortal or damn near it within twenty to forty years as predicted) but we can start the domino effect that our children and our children's children will benefit from (not to mention future generations of cute little kittens! Do you really want them to suffer?)

It's stupid to pray to a God who may or may not exist to fix the problem. We got ourselves into this and we damn sure gotta get ourselves out of it. Just like an addict owning up to his problem. If he never started in the first place he wouldn't be in rehab now would he?

~David McGhee