Brother Larry/Attorney Scott archives: April 2014

sent 2/2614 glyphosate (aka Roundup): really bad stuff in our food; eat organic if you can

sent 2/26/14 Subject: glyphosate (aka Roundup): really bad stuff in our food; eat organic if you can

There are two things in this, related. This first came from a beloved member of my family. I can and do hereby certify as to her intelligence.

1. Correlation, so not proof. But interesting nonetheless. I had my intestinal meltdown in 2001 which is the beginning of the ramp up on the charts. So I am one of the stats shown.

More reason to eat organic, as if you needed more.

http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/glyphosate-wheat-and-intestinal-disease#slide=3

Glyphosate is the main ingredient in Roundup, the herbicide widely applied to GMO crops which have been genetically altered to be immune to it. So it kills the weeds not the corn, wheat, canola, soybeans. Read the Wikipedia page on glyphosate, originally developed as a chemical warfare agent.

This is from yesterday's paper, on glyphosate:

2. "Limits sought on weed killer to help monarch butterflies"
Read more here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/02/25/219337/limits-sought-on-weed-killer-to.html#emlnl=Environment_Newsletter#storylink=cpy

I guess for once I'll make a suggestion: Those of us who might be able to eat organic probably should do so in addition to anything else you may be inspired to do about this not-so-great thing out of Monsanto.

Larry
------adding received comment forwarded 3/3/14 below----------
Larry, thanks for greenmedinfo.com

It gives a lot of important reasons for opposing GMO and the pesticides and herbicides that are spread around and the people in regulatory agencies who help Monsanto and other companies.

This time in early early Spring, I want to get to the DOT of NY and get them to spread less herbicides on every single road side as if we would not see it without a splash of dead grass next to it. A good example of what happens when weeds are allowed to thrive by the roadside is the Seneca Indian Reservation with man high weeds and beautiful tiny flowers on and we need it for beauty and the bees and pollinators need the food and we do not need the toxins from the herbicides.

Why not hire people to use weed whackers and get to work on any road sides which need the weeds to be whacked-- that is not all the signs at all.

We also need more education about the toxic effect of pesticides and weedkillers and for example the weedkillers live on forever in the water and should not be spread near a creek or even allowed to erode the soil next to a roadside and that is how the water gets contaminated and the frogs and salamanders die with the humans.

Lots of work to do even if we PERSONALLY are not affected-- we need to expand our interest to include others as well as plants and animals.

--

http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
It is wonderful having a conversation with someone who does not have the concept of respecting my intelligence mixed up with the false concept of having to do what I say just because I am intelligent.

sent 4/29/14 something I wrote to Andy Schmookler: strong tendency with Republican minions' ideas

N.B. Based on an express assumption/question that was expressed to me privately since I sent this--received from an old friend together with whom I have been renewing our friendship recently, I feel that I should add that I myself have no role in the Democratic Party whatsoever, whatever anyone might have been thinking. Larry

----------------------

Subject: something I wrote to Andy Schmookler: strong tendency with Republican minions' ideas

I have mentioned various ideas that were being espoused by my good friend Andrew (Andy) Bard Schmookler over the years. I have been following along with him lately. All the background you need right now is that the words "wholeness" and "brokenness" are part of the language that Andy uses a lot in working to share his idea about what is wrong with our society and how best to go about fixing it.

I just sent him this as a bit of private correspondence earlier when I was thinking about him. Now I am sharing it with you. Note that this contains no private words from Dr. Schmookler, only my words, so there is no breach here of my deadly serious and absolute confidentiality rule.

I would add that there is no comparing parties here. Whatever you personally may think about each of the huge variety of ideas among the members and camp followers of the Democratic Party there just is no such machine in the Democratic Party that is as huge and centralized as what the Republican Party leadership has put together in recent years. That's just another dispassionate fact from study and observation over many years.
-------------------------------------

Dear Andy

For the sake of trying to be helpful, except for the risk of the word "minions" sounding as though I am talking about ants, I would say that the ideas in Republican propaganda and that are disseminated through the party minions tend to be separated one from another and make no sense when trying to put them all together to make any sort of whole. In that sense the ideas are "broken."

The above is, I think, a more or less objective observation, or the best I can do at being objective. To an only slightly lesser certainty the above "problem" is not a problem at all for those who are originating the ideas. I am thinking they must be quite cynical about it. I think they think the craziness, if I may call it that, the disconnection of ideas one from another, is a good thing for their personal and family well-being. They've got bills to pay too, you know, is how they feel about it, same as everyone else. That last is from an inside study I read by a reputable psychologist. [I shared that with many people at the time, I remember, so it must be among my sent emails of one year or another.]

Another new tagline is below, to provide proper context.

Larry

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
Above all there is no need to become one of the haters no matter how many of them there may be. :-)

sent 4/23/14 on class warfare rev1

This is revised 4/26/14 by adding at the bottom. LS
-------4/23/14---------
Subject: on class warfare

I share this because I feel it might be time to remind you of something about me. If you know it already and remember it then it's ok, this won't hurt you. This conversation is taking place with a very dear and lovely friend of mine, and I'm not kidding, she is a dear friend and has been for a long time. As it happens she's a Republican. She is not on my bcc list, so I just bent my usual rule a bit in introducing her even that much. It's for background. I had mentioned the fact that an increasing proportion of the super rich have inherited their money rather than having had to work at all for it. I had mentioned it only as a matter of fact, not as part of any sort of moral commentary about anybody at all.

Anon53:

There are many reasons why people are rich or poor and encouraging class warfare solves nothing

LAS (my) reply:

Well excuse me for saying so, <Anon53>, but class warfare does seem to solve many things for some people, people who can manage to keep it all away from them and their lives. They've got it solved. [This could be a bit ambiguous if you're just coming in. I was referring mainly to people who enjoy living in castles and in gated communities with armed guards doing their best either to be visible or to be invisible--out of the way either way--most of the time.]

But hey, [<Anon53>.] I have no complaint for myself personally as long as my little Social Security contract holds up, so please do not get what I am saying mixed up with any such idea as that, that the observations I make are just all about me besides the fact that it's me saying I've made observations. We are just having a conversation, hopefully intelligent, intelligible and friendly.

I am dead serious about that. I have made my own decisions in my life and I take responsibility for my decisions. I just want the U.S. government to hold up its end of our deal, where I paid for insurance and of course want to collect from the policy. Otherwise by telling people facts that I learn I am not taking it upon myself to try to rescue anyone at all from any decisions they have made or situations they've gotten themselves into--except by specific request and then only when I'm being paid, and I am not soliciting for jobs these days.

[As an admission of an exception on my part I told a story here about helping a relative for free at least once.]

I only talk about that attitude of mine once in awhile, in case you might not have noticed. :-) [love, Larry]

Now you know, if you didn't know already. Hopefully it will increase your understanding that by sharing facts and ideas and entertainment that I happen to come across and think worth sharing I am neither trying to hurt you or to rescue you either. I hope not to have the occasion to bother mentioning that again any time soon.

love,
Larry

------adding 4/26/14-------------------------------

I've had further conversation with Anon53 . I'm just sneaking some of it in here without actually having sent it out.

from Anon53:

(paraphrasing heavily) [It is not right that rich people, who in fact pay a lot of taxes, be accused of not paying their "fair share" of taxes by people who themselves pay no taxes at all.]

LAS (my) reply

Dear <Anon53>,

....today's issue for most people is survival.

Life is not fair, and neither is this world. And furthermore, we don't know what's coming. One question is how long are we going to be able to try to get along as more or less peaceful people, some of us. I mean, where else can we go? Yes I'm leaping ahead a bit. It is very peaceful here right now in fact. I hope you're able to get some peace some of the time. :-)

love, Larry

sent 4/11/2014 MAJOR Andy Schmookler: A Path to Democratic Victory this Fall

Subject: Andy Schmookler: A Path to Democratic Victory this Fall

Referencing recent conversations, yes you can do any and all of this and other things and Be Here Now both at the same time. <not joke>

I think that our books and articles author intellectual activist friend Andrew Bard (Andy) Schmookler could really be onto something here. I know it to be true even without the poll data link that there are many Republican Party members, not just Democratic Party members, who simply hate the very idea of big money having as much power as it does in their Party. So it seems possible that many members of both parties could decide to get behind a candidate who puts forth the idea of a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and McCutcheon should be and is one of the highest priorities if anything of our country is to be salvaged. I am holding a note about Al Franken and yet another brand new tagline for the bottom (below) after Andy's post, next:

Andy Schmookler: A Path to Democratic Victory this Fall
Do the 2014 elections look promising for the Democrats? Not so far as I can tell.
Do the Democrats have a bold plan to inspire the American people to turn the House back over to them? Not so far as I’ve heard.
Is there a solution available? I think there is.
We’ve got a Supreme Court that just doubled down on its disgraceful 2010 decision in Citizens United, continuing in the new case (McCutcheon vs. FEC) to pretend to believe that opening the floodgates still wider for big money to flow into our elections does not corrupt our political system.
And we’ve got poll data that indicates that the overwhelming majority of the American people – across the political spectrum – believe there’s too much money in our politics, and that the rich are getting too large a voice at the expense of average Americans. The people, it seems, understand that our “democracy” is being put up for auction. And they don’t like it.
There’s an opportunity there. It’s an opportunity that not only could benefit the Democrats, but also would be right and noble to seize. It could help rescue this nation from its present descent into oligarchy, in betrayal of the democracy our founders had in mind.
The Supreme Court – as corrupt as the five-member, Republican-appointed majority has made it – has precluded the possibility of mere legislation protecting the integrity of our election process. The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means, and for the foreseeable future our Constitution will persist in its present contorted form in which corporations are persons and money is speech.
That leaves but one solution: to amend the Constitution.
We cannot afford to wait for a better Supreme Court. Indeed, by the time the billionaires and mega-corporations have finished surging through the holes that John Roberts and his buddies have opened up, we’d likely be so dominated by big money that the better justices we’ve been waiting for would be unable to get nominated and confirmed.
The Democrats should unite to run this year behind a pledge to enact a constitutional amendment that clearly and unambiguously not only overturns these recent decisions but also goes further to establish a system of public financing for all our federal elections.

It’s a battle the American people would welcome as if the bugles had sounded and the cavalry were galloping in to the rescue. It is appropriate and useful to present the Koch brothers to the American people as the face of the Republican Party, as Senator Reid has been doing. But it would be more powerfully appealing to the electorate for them to be offered a way to rid themselves of the whole menace of plutocracy.
This is not the place to lay out the text for such an amendment. (I like the idea of one that gives every registered voter a voucher that can only be used in the election process and that bars all other money from that process. That would re-establish the equality of “one person, one vote” that is subverted now by a system of “one dollar, one vote.”)
But whatever the form, the people might well respond favorably to such an attempt to restore control over the American government to the people of this nation.
It is certainly a sad state of affairs when the Republicans, after five years of disgraceful conduct, seem now more likely to gain control of the Senate than to lose control of the House. Maybe, if the Democrats can take a strong position on behalf of the people in an area where the people are apparently quite aware they are getting short shrift, that dismal prognosis can be reversed.
And whatever the immediate electoral results, putting front and center the idea of getting such an amendment into the Constitution can only be good for America.
-----------------------
As I said above, it looks to me as though this idea has serious potential. What about getting on the phone to the leaders of your party or using email, fax, or letter by pony express but better go talk to them if you can about you yourself--and maybe some friends?--wanting a candidate who is willing to swear on a stack of alternating Bibles, Talmuds, and Korans as well as humanist writings that she or he will make it a priority to push wherever and whenever possible formally and informally for an amendment to the United States Constitution that will take down the tragic decisions of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United and McCutcheon. Politicians know very well about those decisions and the consequences of those decisions to them personally, whatever their individual situations. So we are asking for great courage here. And I suppose they would need money from many many more people than their opponents need money from. :-7

Speaking of money, WHATEVER STATE YOU ARE IN please send whatever bit of money you can afford, to support U.S. Senator Al Franken's campaign for reelection. Al Franken is one of those who are promising to keep on working hard to overcome those two Supreme Court decisions, and obviously this is a national issue. And I am convinced that he means it with all his heart. And he is being targeted hard now by a few people who like the idea of having just come into fuller control.

For major news ongoing, see sources along the right side at http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com, McClatchy being on average the weightiest of the reliable sources. There is also a major list of news sources at the bottom of the page at CommonDreams.org. Those news sources are very different one from another, not so much as to their factual statements but rather in what they choose to emphasize.

Larry

sent 4/5/2014 Book recommendation: "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" by Thomas Piketty (March 10, 2014)

Subject: Book recommendation: Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty (March 10, 2014)

This one is highly recommended in "McCutcheon, and the Vicious Cycle of Concentrated Wealth and Political Power" by Robert Reich, April 4, 2014. And the reviews at Amazon are overwhelming as to the power of Thomas Piketty's book. A number of the reviews are very informative.

I have had a complaint recently about my "failure" to rewrite what an author that I cite has written. Sorry (not), if you have a firm policy of refusing to click links and read then I suppose you might as well tell me to stop writing to you. Very often when I do write a comment it is about a different topic than the point or main topic of a linked article, which main point or topic is the main reason for my message. Just so you know.

Larry

sent 4/14/2014 optional reading, "Scientific American," 2d top expert opinion on climate change

Subject: sent 4/14/2014 optional reading, "Scientific American," 2d top expert opinion on climate change

If you are looking for a second highly respected scientist's findings after having heard Guy McPherson's highly respected findings the other day,* there is this dated March 18, 2014 in the venerable popular Scientific American. I say this is optional because if you really "got" Guy McPherson then this seems close enough that what is new here, and there are some new things, might not make a huge difference to you. The article sounds very scientific to this particular non-scientist. However, by working hard and following him step by step, I believe I was able to follow along quite well enough with what he said.

"Earth Will Cross the Climate Danger Threshold by 2036"
by Dr. Michael E. Mann, Scientific American, March 18, 2014
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earth-will-cross-the-climate-danger-threshold-by-2036/

You might remember my November 19, 2013 reference to Dr. Mann and his famous 2011 book. There is also a graphic reproduction of Dr. Mann's hockey stick, the subject of the book.
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2013/11/sent-111913-solution-emergency.html

Larry

* "[A]fter having heard [Scientist] Guy McPherson's findings the other day" refers to http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2014/04/sent-4102014-yet-another-comment-and.html. Quoting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-zZtrZebRc (April 4, 2014). If you think you can stand this for the sake of information, nothing else,* then I recommend starting it at around the 27 minutes point and listening through to the end. The video is offset from the audio here, which is a bit annoying, but one does not have to watch all the time just to see who these men are. [Listening is enough.]

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments

sent 4/14/2014 comment and reply Re: very short plain English translation of Be Here Now

From previous message (below), my restatement of the concept known as "Be Here Now": "Keep your mind focused on the present most of the time rather than allowing yourself to get too wrapped up in the past or future. That is a happier and more productive way to live almost no matter who you are or where you are."

comment and reply:

Anon657:

It seems like you have thought up a general statement and then inserted wording that allows exceptions in the event that I have a problem with your general statement, like above when you said "almost no matter who you are or where you are". It reminds me of a friend of mine who showed me a paper for one of her college classes: A theological statement for my lifetime*
(*unless I change my mind)

Larry replied:

You were not an exception that I had in mind at all. The exceptions that had come to mind were professional historians and history book writers. For the rest of us learning history is useful, but let us not live our daily lives in our imaginings about the past or about the future. Perhaps I should not have included that phrase.

Larry
--
"Let us move forward and not dwell on the past and use it as an excuse not to change"--Anon44

On 4/12/2014 10:54 AM, Larry Scott wrote:

Subject: very short plain English translation of Be Here Now

A monologue from a friend on Ram Dass has led me to a realization that the words "Be here now" might need further translation:

"Keep your mind focused on the present most of the time rather than allowing yourself to get too wrapped up in the past or future. That is a happier and more productive way to live almost no matter who you are or where you are."

Larry

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
The concept that people wearing suits all think the same way is TOTALLY false, not even remotely true except for the bare concept of wearing a suit sometimes. Remember for example Alfred Korzybski, who sometimes wore a suit and thought differently from everyone else at the time, both at once. The fact that there are billions of different true stories that no one could invent is sometimes a difficult concept, or so I find.

sent 4/10/2014 yet another comment and pithy reply Re: more comments and pithy replies Re: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)

Subject: sent 4/10/2014 yet *another* comment and pithy reply Re: more comments and pithy replies Re: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)

Fyi this is a different Anon, so let us say this is Anon2:

I know you better than [to think you would suddenly not care about my mental health any more.] I knew what you meant. You are too kind above everything else with a child like belief in the good out there. [emphasis added--LS]

My instant reply to Anon2:

Big mistake there. I just do not see the point in spreading more evil. Opposing evil with evil just does not sound right to me. I will be just as dead either way, whenever my time comes. :-) Larry

On 4/10/2014 12:19 PM, Larry Scott wrote:
[Posted at http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2014/04/sent-4102014-more-comments-and-pithy.html ]

Subject: more comments and pithy replies Re: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)

Two paragraphs are highlit.

Dear [Anon],

LS: I have answered all the parts of your message below to my satisfaction in my email "Subject: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)" (4/8/2014 2:27 PM) except that the following additions seem called for now: As far as I am aware, no one has a gun to your head to follow anyone else's advice. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and now you want to censor Guy McPherson??? Gasp!!!! lol

Anon: Just the opposite: I want to express my opinion that he is doing more harm than good by straying out of his area of expertise. By telling people the simplistic message "Be nice to each other", he is essentially telling them "prepare to do nothing". He is going to make it harder for the activists who come along and try to organize people.

LS2: "Doing nothing" means not getting out of bed in the morning. Obviously Guy McPherson gets out of bed in the morning and does some things. Therefore: it is clear to me that you have misinterpreted his advice, the meaning he intended with his words.

Anon: People will argue with the activists by referring to the "expert" who told them that nothing can be done (except being nice).

LS2: What part of "I hope so" didn't you get?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: Yes I know people who want avoid hearing facts, meaning they prefer that people change the facts to fit what they would prefer to hear.

Anon: That is a lot different from what you originally said "like being lied to".

LS2: Substituting false "facts" for true facts is the precise definition of lying.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: And you were the one complaining about Guy McPherson's advice having a bad effect on your mental health, or so I understand. That is how the topic arose.

Anon: I don't recall using the term "mental health". Can you find exactly where I said that? It's not the kind of phrase I introduce into a discussion.

LS2: It came from my understanding of your interpretation of Guy McPherson's advice that he was advising you not to bother getting out of bed in the morning. If you followed that understanding of his advice then and didn't get out of bed in the morning, at least some people would probably construe that as a mental health problem. You seemed to be saying that trying to follow his advice would mean staying in bed all day, meaning "His advice is bad for my mental health."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: My point was, my mental health is my problem, your mental health is your problem

Anon: I disagree with that. We are in this together. One person's mental health problems belong to everyone. If you doubt that, ask the people whose kids went to Columbine or Sandy Hook schools.

LS2: Obviously what I said did not come out the way I intended. I certainly did not mean that all of a sudden I do not care about your mental health, guy. I meant that you are the first authority on what is or is not good for your mental health, over anyone else in the world. I have said precisely that to you many many times before.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: and if someone cares to make a suggestion, hey, some suggestions have been known to help some people. I think your complaint is completely unreasonable. You don't like his advice? So ignore it and live in the past and don't be decent to other people. Whatever. I don't see your problem, and it is hard for me to believe that you are even serious. I refer you now again to 4/8/2014 2:27 PM.

Anon: Oh, I am serious. Someone giving bad advice is everyone's problem.

LS2: Again, I think the problem is in your interpretation of his advice. See above. Ram Dass, the author of Be Here Now did not stay in bed all day. He went around teaching groups of people. He did things, in other words.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: [Having been questioned,] "Yes I know people who want avoid hearing facts, meaning they prefer that people change the facts to fit what they would prefer to hear....."
That is the topic of Barbara Ehrenreich's famous classic, Bright-Sided: How Positive Thinking Is Undermining America. I thought you were familiar with that. See my message of 3/19/2014 12:18 PM among others.

Anon: Does she also use the expression "people like being lied to"?

LS2: I can't say precisely what wording she used. I got her meaning and have shared my understanding of her meaning with others who understood her the same way. Again, "Substituting false "facts" for true facts is the precise definition of lying," as in, "Everything's going to be ok." That's lying, unless you are hiding an unusual definition of "ok."

LS2: But she also focuses hard on part of the problem being people's failure to question experts and to get enough facts to be able to draw their own intelligent conclusions. [emphasis added LS]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anon: ....In your doctor experience, did you ever go to a specialist? Try asking one a medical question outside of his specialty and watch how fast he backs off from giving you an answer.....

LS307: This is entirely separate from and independent of anything else I've said, just throwing it in fyi: What you've said right there has not got the slightest application to this situation. You have referred to a special obligation that is imposed on medical professionals. To my recollection no one whom we've mentioned lately is or was one of those except for Eric Berne, M.D. You cannot sue any of the people we've mentioned lately for being mistaken any more than anyone can sue you for being mistaken. Please do your best not to tell me that you have this bit of information mixed up in your mind with anything else that I have said, which was all that really needed to be said.

Anon2: It is an example to demonstrate that when you are in a position of being educated in a certain field (like Guy McPherson or a medical specialist), you are expected to stay within the limits of that field, especially if you are on TV. To start giving solutions like "Be nice to each other" is very irresponsible.

LS2: Obviously people have different opinions on that. In this case your complaint might rather have been, "Sir, you should have explained better what you meant. You were just way too ambiguous!" Obviously his response would have been, "Sorry sir, the time was very short."

LS2: Another way of saying "Be here now" might be "Stay focused on what you are doing. Use discipline to stop your mind from wandering to other times and places, especially when you're trying to do serious work." Ram Dass was into meditation also, in fact, so I would not say that he meant stop the practice of meditation altogether. [emphasis added-LS]

Larry

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:     comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)
Date:     Tue, 08 Apr 2014 14:27:03 -0400
From:     Larry Scott <larryascott@larryascott.com>
To:     undisclosed-recipients:;

I have been having some correspondence with a friend, correspondence triggered by the video linked below. I want to share it with you. It is in this context, and it is about the lack of necessity and even counterproductive effect of comparing oneself to others.

Anon: ...[W]e all are faced with two futures. Future #1 that is going to happen to us no matter what we do. And Future #2 that is determined by what we do now in the present. Unlike [name, doesn't matter] Guy McPherson and other narrow minded people, I want to live in the second future. [emphasis added-LS]

LS: Ok, more power to you, [Anon]!

Anon: However, professors with zero political skills like Guy McPherson and James Lovelock are hurting that effort rather than helping it.

LS2: I thought I was going to just ignore this, let it go, but it has been bugging me. These people are to be given at least some credit for being dedicated to doing what they believe is right, which can be characterized as doing their best to learn facts and to share those those facts that they have learned with all who care to listen. I am very glad that there are those courageous enough to be doing that in the face of opposition from people who appear to prefer being lied to. Shit, you want these guys to be therapists? You want them to have a good bed-side manner? You want them to LIE at least to some extent about what they believe to be true? Well if so, you and I have a major disagreement. I want them to say what they have to say, tell it straight, and let me worry about taking care of my own mental health. Of course if there are disagreements among experts then I might take credibility factors into account in deciding which set of factual allegations to act upon, if there is any acting to be done on my part. But please spare me the personality analyses. What they have accomplished, finally, is, they have managed to pry some people loose from the "God will take care of everything, the earth can handle what we're doing, no problem, we have nothing to do with the changes of climate and/or global warming, so let us pay no attention" point of view that people who see things differently call "denial." I think they have done a good thing. Guy McPherson's effort to channel Carolyn Baker toward the end--they know each other--was extra, not really part of his job whether you think his advice was good or bad. I do not think he was there mainly to give advice. He answered because Thom Hartmann asked him. I do not at all think that you are are wrong in acting on the notion that survival is possible if we work together at it. I think we might as well be doing that and hey, you're right, people make mistakes and anything is possible. I just hate wasting my time thinking about and responding to your put-downs of people. As far as I am concerned I do not need those put-downs. In fact they get in the way of rational thought as far as I am concerned.

I still do not want to discuss further what you or I or we or others want to do next other than that "More power to you, [Anon]." Discussing what you or I or we or others want to do next is not what this message is about at all. It's about the lack of necessity and even counterproductive effect of comparing oneself to others.

P.S. I disagree with Anon's characterization of the situation as being a choice of two different futures. Actually there are many more choices than that. And of course yes, how we act and what we do affects our present and future and the present and future of everyone else also..

Larry

On 4/6/2014 3:39 PM, Larry Scott wrote:

Subject: dead serious 30 min vid: the last word on climate change (message 1 of 2)

This puts the cap on one thing we've been talking about over the years, climate change/global warming. This very clearly appears to be the final word on the subject, at least for now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-zZtrZebRc (April 4, 2014). If you think you can stand this for the sake of information, nothing else,* then I recommend starting it at around the 27 minutes point and listening through to the end. The video is offset from the audio here, which is a bit annoying, but one does not have to watch all the time just to see who these men are, the well-known journalist and commentator Thom Hartmann, whose work I have cited a few times over the years, and ecology & evolutionary biologist Guy McPherson, author of the book Going Dark (October 2013). This high tech conversation took place April 4, 2014, two days ago. It is up to date. He talks about the new IPCC report, repeating here the 44pg pdf download link for the executive summary that I sent you the other day.

This video could comprise the most convincing statement of fact that you will ever see. Watch. I think you will be able tell for yourself. (Hint: human extinction in a startlingly short time due to loss of habitability.)

* I plan to offer some help with that in my next message. (Hint: Listen to Guy McPherson's words near the end. Paraphrasing briefly: Be Here/Now. And do your best to be a decent human being from now on. I know, you are a decent person. So it's something to keep in mind.)
There will be more.

love,

Larry

big news, new tagline:

Be Here/Now. And do your best to be a decent human being from now on. I know, you are a decent person. So it's something to keep in mind. Another way of saying "Be here now" might be "Stay focused on what you are doing. Use discipline to stop your mind from wandering to other times and places, especially when you're trying to do serious work." Ram Dass was into meditation also, in fact, so I would not say that he meant stop the practice of meditation altogether.
more at: http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2014/04/sent-31914-staying-upright-response-to.html

sent 4/2/2014 possible ideas-Nationwide Actions You Can Join to Address America's Environmental and Social Crises

Subject: possible ideas-Nationwide Actions You Can Join to Address America's Environmental and Social Crises

Again, I am not telling anyone what to do. At least some of these appear to be very positive ideas. If the shoe fits....

love,
Larry

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
The concept that people wearing suits all think the same way is TOTALLY false, not even remotely true except for the bare concept of wearing a suit sometimes. Remember for example Alfred Korzybski, who sometimes wore a suit and thought differently from everyone else at the time, both at once. The fact that there are billions of different true stories that no one could invent is sometimes a difficult concept, or so I find.

sent 3/19/14 staying upright, response to serious complaint; 1 min Wendell Berry: Poet & Prophet, reads

sent 3/19/14 Subject: staying upright, response to serious complaint; 1 min Wendell Berry: Poet & Prophet, reads

This may be review for some and not for others. love, Larry

Comment received: Reading much of this on global warming and all the other negative realities is plain depressing ....

Sharing my two private replies one after the other:
1. Yes, it can be a struggle to avoid getting depressed over all the big problems. I don't agree with calling them negative realities, though. I mean what's the point? Despite what some say, I am of the opinion that it is unreasonable, really, for a full grown adult, to live in total denial of problems that really are affecting her or him every day. For one thing, Barbara Ehrenreich said so in another classic book. It is not that one has to think about each and every problem each and every day.

There are a number of resources, quite different one from another, that you could possibly find useful in maintaining your active and positive self, that might supplement the tools you already use. Some are major works, major people. I have been through all of these things, remind myself of some of them from time to time, and recommend them for your consideration. These links are all from down along the right side of my blog pages, "sources, selected posts." Obviously the idea is they're supposed to help. In no particular order:
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2013/06/sent-6213-get-apocalyptic-why-radical.html
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2013/05/sent-5513-eyes-wide-open-hope.html
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2013/05/sent-12212-major-i-like-myself.html
http://www.carolynbaker.net/

Carolyn Baker is last but not least. I think I have more or less absorbed her but now don't think about her much. Over time I have spent significant time with her on line. She become another personal friend of mine. She sent me a copy of her latest book. I promised her I'd read it but haven't managed to get very far yet. I think it is probably great, but, having read other books and materials of hers, I think I've got the idea already. She is doing her thing, being a professional therapist. I am doing a rather different thing, though I have shared her with others, am sharing her with you, and will be talking more about her again in the future.

2. Barbara Ehrenreich starts out that book with the true story of her having been a cancer patient hanging out with a group of other cancer patients--all saying "Think positive." You've probably heard that that's the common cancer patient mantra. According to Barbara Ehrenreich she saved her own life, yes with some assistance, by paying attention, studying hard for herself, and taking charge of her own treatment. She watched as others died while relying totally upon their doctors to take care of them while they were engaged in thinking positive. Barbara Ehrenreich believes in having some fun, I am sure, but she thinks that one can work on difficult problems without getting overwhelmed to the point of giving up. That's my notion also. Larry

On 3/18/2014 12:28 AM, Larry Scott wrote:

http://vimeo.com/74755473
one (1) minute

The Peace of Wild Things
By Wendell Berry

When despair for the world grows in me
and I wake in the night at the least sound
in fear of what my life and my children’s lives may be,
I go and lie down where the wood drake
rests in his beauty on the water, and the great heron feeds.
I come into the peace of wild things
who do not tax their lives with forethought
of grief. I come into the presence of still water.
And I feel above me the day-blind stars
waiting with their light. For a time
I rest in the grace of the world, and am free.

-------------------------
You might remember this wonderful 39 min 39 sec Bill Moyers video with Wendell Barry.
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2013/10/sent-101213-my-hero-wendell-berry-on.html

Larry

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments

The concept that people wearing suits all think the same way is TOTALLY false, not even remotely true except for the bare concept of wearing a suit sometimes. Remember for example Alfred Korzybski, who sometimes wore a suit and thought differently from everyone else at the time, both at once. The fact that there are billions of different true stories that no one could invent is sometimes a difficult concept, or so I find.

sent 4/10/2014 more comments and pithy replies Re: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)

I do realize that this is my first post here since November 29, 2013. By no means does that mean that have stopped writing. I just have not yet had time to catch things up here. This one I want to go ahead and post out of order so that I can link to it. love to all, Larry

======================

Subject: more comments and pithy replies Re: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)

Two paragraphs are highlit.

Dear [Anon],

LS: I have answered all the parts of your message below to my satisfaction in my email "Subject: comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)" (4/8/2014 2:27 PM) except that the following additions seem called for now: As far as I am aware, no one has a gun to your head to follow anyone else's advice. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and now you want to censor Guy McPherson??? Gasp!!!! lol

Anon: Just the opposite: I want to express my opinion that he is doing more harm than good by straying out of his area of expertise. By telling people the simplistic message "Be nice to each other", he is essentially telling them "prepare to do nothing". He is going to make it harder for the activists who come along and try to organize people.

LS2: "Doing nothing" means not getting out of bed in the morning. Obviously Guy McPherson gets out of bed in the morning and does some things. Therefore: it is clear to me that you have misinterpreted his advice, the meaning he intended with his words.

Anon: People will argue with the activists by referring to the "expert" who told them that nothing can be done (except being nice).

LS2: What part of "I hope so" didn't you get?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: Yes I know people who want avoid hearing facts, meaning they prefer that people change the facts to fit what they would prefer to hear.

Anon: That is a lot different from what you originally said "like being lied to".

LS2: Substituting false "facts" for true facts is the precise definition of lying.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: And you were the one complaining about Guy McPherson's advice having a bad effect on your mental health, or so I understand. That is how the topic arose.

Anon: I don't recall using the term "mental health". Can you find exactly where I said that? It's not the kind of phrase I introduce into a discussion.

LS2: It came from my understanding of your interpretation of Guy McPherson's advice that he was advising you not to bother getting out of bed in the morning. If you followed that understanding of his advice then and didn't get out of bed in the morning, at least some people would probably construe that as a mental health problem. You seemed to be saying that trying to follow his advice would mean staying in bed all day, meaning "His advice is bad for my mental health."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: My point was, my mental health is my problem, your mental health is your problem

Anon: I disagree with that. We are in this together. One person's mental health problems belong to everyone. If you doubt that, ask the people whose kids went to Columbine or Sandy Hook schools.

LS2: Obviously what I said did not come out the way I intended. I certainly did not mean that all of a sudden I do not care about your mental health, guy. I meant that you are the first authority on what is or is not good for your mental health, over anyone else in the world. I have said precisely that to you many many times before.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: and if someone cares to make a suggestion, hey, some suggestions have been known to help some people. I think your complaint is completely unreasonable. You don't like his advice? So ignore it and live in the past and don't be decent to other people. Whatever. I don't see your problem, and it is hard for me to believe that you are even serious. I refer you now again to 4/8/2014 2:27 PM.

Anon: Oh, I am serious. Someone giving bad advice is everyone's problem.

LS2: Again, I think the problem is in your interpretation of his advice. See above. Ram Dass, the author of Be Here Now did not stay in bed all day. He went around teaching groups of people. He did things, in other words.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LS: [Having been questioned,] "Yes I know people who want avoid hearing facts, meaning they prefer that people change the facts to fit what they would prefer to hear....."
That is the topic of Barbara Ehrenreich's famous classic, Bright-Sided: How Positive Thinking Is Undermining America. I thought you were familiar with that. See my message of 3/19/2014 12:18 PM among others.

Anon: Does she also use the expression "people like being lied to"?

LS2: I can't say precisely what wording she used. I got her meaning and have shared my understanding of her meaning with others who understood her the same way. Again, "Substituting false "facts" for true facts is the precise definition of lying," as in, "Everything's going to be ok." That's lying, unless you are hiding an unusual definition of "ok."

LS2: But she also focuses hard on part of the problem being people's failure to question experts and to get enough facts to be able to draw their own intelligent conclusions. [emphasis added LS]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anon: ....In your doctor experience, did you ever go to a specialist? Try asking one a medical question outside of his specialty and watch how fast he backs off from giving you an answer.....

LS307: This is entirely separate from and independent of anything else I've said, just throwing it in fyi: What you've said right there has not got the slightest application to this situation. You have referred to a special obligation that is imposed on medical professionals. To my recollection no one whom we've mentioned lately is or was one of those except for Eric Berne, M.D. You cannot sue any of the people we've mentioned lately for being mistaken any more than anyone can sue you for being mistaken. Please do your best not to tell me that you have this bit of information mixed up in your mind with anything else that I have said, which was all that really needed to be said.

Anon2: It is an example to demonstrate that when you are in a position of being educated in a certain field (like Guy McPherson or a medical specialist), you are expected to stay within the limits of that field, especially if you are on TV. To start giving solutions like "Be nice to each other" is very irresponsible.

LS2: Obviously people have different opinions on that. In this case your complaint might rather have been, "Sir, you should have explained better what you meant. You were just way too ambiguous!" Obviously his response would have been, "Sorry sir, the time was very short."

LS2: Another way of saying "Be here now" might be "Stay focused on what you are doing. Use discipline to stop your mind from wandering to other times and places, especially when you're trying to do serious work." Ram Dass was into meditation also, in fact, so I would not say that he meant stop the practice of meditation altogether. [emphasis added-LS]

Larry

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:     comment and reply Re: the last word on climate change 30 min vid dead serious (message 1 of 2)
Date:     Tue, 08 Apr 2014 14:27:03 -0400
From:     Larry Scott <larryascott@larryascott.com>
To:     undisclosed-recipients:;

Anon: ...[W]e all are faced with two futures. Future #1 that is going to happen to us no matter what we do. And Future #2 that is determined by what we do now in the present. Unlike [name, doesn't matter] Guy McPherson and other narrow minded people, I want to live in the second future. [emphasis added-LS]

LS: Ok, more power to you, [Anon]!

Anon: However, professors with zero political skills like Guy McPherson and James Lovelock are hurting that effort rather than helping it.

LS2: I thought I was going to just ignore this, let it go, but it has been bugging me. These people are to be given at least some credit for being dedicated to doing what they believe is right, which can be characterized as doing their best to learn facts and to share those those facts that they have learned with all who care to listen. I am very glad that there are those courageous enough to be doing that in the face of opposition from people who appear to prefer being lied to. Shit, you want these guys to be therapists? You want them to have a good bed-side manner? You want them to LIE at least to some extent about what they believe to be true? Well if so, you and I have a major disagreement. I want them to say what they have to say, tell it straight, and let me worry about taking care of my own mental health. Of course if there are disagreements among experts then I might take credibility factors into account in deciding which set of factual allegations to act upon, if there is any acting to be done on my part. But please spare me the personality analyses. What they have accomplished, finally, is, they have managed to pry some people loose from the "God will take care of everything, the earth can handle what we're doing, no problem, we have nothing to do with the changes of climate and/or global warming, so let us pay no attention" point of view that people who see things differently call "denial." I think they have done a good thing. Guy McPherson's effort to channel Carolyn Baker toward the end--they know each other--was extra, not really part of his job whether you think his advice was good or bad. I do not think he was there mainly to give advice. He answered because Thom Hartmann asked him. I do not at all think that you are are wrong in acting on the notion that survival is possible if we work together at it. I think we might as well be doing that and hey, you're right, people make mistakes and anything is possible. I just hate wasting my time thinking about and responding to your put-downs of people. As far as I am concerned I do not need those put-downs. In fact they get in the way of rational thought as far as I am concerned.

I still do not want to discuss further what you or I or we or others want to do next other than that "More power to you, [Anon]." Discussing what you or I or we or others want to do next is not what this message is about at all. It's about the lack of necessity and even counterproductive effect of comparing oneself to others.

P.S. I disagree with Anon's characterization of the situation as being a choice of two different futures. Actually there are many more choices than that. And of course yes, how we act and what we do affects our present and future and the present and future of everyone else also..

Larry

On 4/6/2014 3:39 PM, Larry Scott wrote:

Subject: dead serious 30 min vid: the last word on climate change (message 1 of 2)

This puts the cap on one thing we've been talking about over the years, climate change/global warming. This very clearly appears to be the final word on the subject, at least for now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-zZtrZebRc (April 4, 2014). If you think you can stand this for the sake of information, nothing else,* then I recommend starting it at around the 27 minutes point and listening through to the end. The video is offset from the audio here, which is a bit annoying, but one does not have to watch all the time just to see who these men are, the well-known journalist and commentator Thom Hartmann, whose work I have cited a few times over the years, and ecology & evolutionary biologist Guy McPherson, author of the book Going Dark (October 2013). This high tech conversation took place April 4, 2014, two days ago. It is up to date. He talks about the new IPCC report, repeating here the 44pg pdf download link for the executive summary that I sent you the other day.

This video could comprise the most convincing statement of fact that you will ever see. Watch. I think you will be able tell for yourself. (Hint: human extinction in a startlingly short time due to loss of habitability.)

* I plan to offer some help with that in my next message. (Hint: Listen to Guy McPherson's words near the end. Paraphrasing briefly: Be Here/Now. And do your best to be a decent human being from now on. I know, you are a decent person. So it's something to keep in mind.)
There will be more.

love,

Larry

--
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com
"undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
Be Here/Now. And do your best to be a decent human being from now on. I know, you are a decent person. So it's something to keep in mind.