Recomended: Occupy Sandy Relief | InterOccupy Hub

The Occupy Movement has taken up the cause of providing disaster relief to the individuals and communities devastated by Hurricane Sandy. Individuals interested in helping or individuals seeking help can look for such at this site:

Occupy Sandy Relief | InterOccupy Hub.

Quote of the day

Mark Fischetti of Scientific American addressed the question of the hour:

If you’ve followed the U.S. news and weather in the past 24 hours you have no doubt run across a journalist or blogger explaining why it’s difficult to say that climate change could be causing big storms like Sandy. Well, no doubt here: it is.

The hedge expressed by journalists is that many variables go into creating a big storm, so the size of Hurricane Sandy, or any specific storm, cannot be attributed to climate change. That’s true, and it’s based on good science. However, that statement does not mean that we cannot say that climate change is making storms bigger. It is doing just that — a statement also based on good science, and one that the insurance industry is embracing, by the way.

Drill, baby, drill….

A once-in-a-generation storm

Avenue C in Lower Manhattan

This was a claim made by the New York Times. I suspect the writers and editors were befuddled by wishful thinking. The reason, of course, is the existence of global warming. Storms of this kind and magnitude may become common events as the globe stores greater and greater amounts of energy. We can expect longstanding weather patterns to pass away along with a greater and greater number of extreme weather events.

Drill, baby, drill….

Quote of the day

Noam Chomsky recently identified Barack Obama and Mitt Romney as “cowards.” The reason:

With the quadrennial presidential election extravaganza reaching its peak, it’s useful to ask how the political campaigns are dealing with the most crucial issues we face. The simple answer is: badly, or not at all. If so, some important questions arise: why, and what can we do about it?

There are two issues of overwhelming significance, because the fate of the species is at stake: environmental disaster, and nuclear war.

To be sure, neither candidate nor their parties want to take decisive action to resolve these two problems. In fact, both candidates and their respective parties wish to make matters worse. Both support the barely regulated exploitation of the world’s resources and both are civilian militarists who have never committed themselves to ridding the world of nuclear weapons and certain not to fostering a cosmopolitan peace throughout the world. They wish not to learn from recent history. By doing so they will not foster the reappearance of a past disaster or three but will, on the one hand, augment the global rush to a new environmental disaster of global scope and, on the other hand, refuse to retard the use of military means to solve political and social problems.

Chomsky could have added the looming disasters to be created by the global economic system.

Hell awaits us