The DaVinci Code

From the Multiply Book Group We Had:

Rating:	★★★★★
Category:	Books
Genre:	Mystery & Thrillers
Author:	Dan Brown

From Publishers Weekly
Brown's latest thriller (after Angels and Demons)is an exhaustively researched page-turner about secret religious societies, ancient coverups and savage vengeance. The action kicks off in modern-day Paris with the murder of the Louvre's chief curator, whose body is found laid out in symbolic repose at the foot of the Mona Lisa. Seizing control of the case are Sophie Neveu, a lovely French police cryptologist, and Harvard symbol expert Robert Langdon, reprising his role from Brown's last book. The two find several puzzling codes at the murder scene, all of which form a treasure map to the fabled Holy Grail. As their search moves from France to England, Neveu and Langdon are confounded by two mysterious groups-the legendary Priory of Sion, a nearly 1,000-year-old secret society whose members have included Botticelli and Isaac Newton, and the conservative Catholic organization Opus Dei. Both have their own reasons for wanting to ensure that the Grail isn't found. Brown sometimes ladles out too much religious history at the expense of pacing, and Langdon is a hero in desperate need of more chutzpah. Still, Brown has assembled a whopper of a plot that will please both conspiracy buffs and thriller addicts. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

State Of Fear

From the Multiply Book Group We had

  July 2009 Book Discussion    

   State of Fear

         by

   Michael Crichton

co-hosted by

Gileson

and

Skeezicks

Links:                                                        

         Video One                                                                  

         Video Two

         Video Three

Discussion Blogs:

          Week One

          Week Two:

                          A

                          B

                          C

          Week Three

          Week Four:

                         A

                         B

                         C

                         D

                         E

                         F

                         G

          Week Five:

                         A

                         B

Attn: State of Fear Readers

From The Multiply Book Group We Had

July 31st is upon us .. any last minute remarks, rebukes, complaints or compliments about the month of  July can still be posted.
I can't speak for Mary, but I personally wouldn't mind getting a "report card" on how you think things went ... not so much on the philosophical issues ... probably there will never be 100% agreement on that, but more so on the technical issues.
Good, bad or indifferent, it doesn't matter, but a little input might help keep this group alive when it is close to going belly up.
If you have suggestions regard the types of books being recommended, jump in. Would you like to see more poetry, more light fiction, more humor, and if so drop a review into the slot and let the rest of the community know.
Get your copies of the DaVinci Code and hunker down ... August should genrate a little heat with that book!

My Life According to John Denver

Stolen from Solo's Page:

Using only song titles from ONE ARTIST of your choice, cleverly answer these questions.   You can't use the band/artist/performer I used.   Do not repeat a song title.  

It's a lot harder than you think!  

Re-post as "My Life According to (band / artist / performer's name)"

HERE ARE MY CHOICES:

Pick your Artist:
John Denver

Are you a male or female:

My Sweet Lady


Describe yourself:

Sunshine On My Shoulders

How do you feel:

Welcome To My Morning


Describe where you currently live:

Take Me Home Country Roads


If you could go anywhere, where would you go?

Rocky Mountain High

Your favorite form of transportation:

Old Train


Your best friend is:

The Music Is You

You and your best friends are:

All Of My Memories

What's the weather like:

Summer

If your life was a TV show, what would it be called:

Thats The Way It's Gonna Be

What is life to you:

Poems and Prayers and Promises

Your relationship:

Today

Your fear:

High Flight

What is the best advice you have to give:

Dancing With The Mountains


Thought for the Day:

Let Us Begin

How I would like to die:

On The Wings Of An Eagle

My soul's present condition:

And So It Goes

Don't Turn The Roast Back On In The Oven Yet!

Another post from the book group we had at Multiply

While I enjoyed "State Of Fear"  very much,  as I always like stories that make me think,  at the close of the book Michael Crichton writes an appendix that really caught my attention.   It can be read in its entirety HERE.  But in case you do not want to go to the site and read  all of it,  here is a quote of some of the contents:

"Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out. . . 

 Its supporters included Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Winston Churchill. It was approved by Supreme Court justices Oliver Wendell Holmes and Louis Brandeis, who ruled in its favor. The famous names who supported it included Alexander Graham Bell, inventor of the telephone; activist Margaret Sanger; botanist Luther Burbank; Leland Stanford, founder of Stanford University; the novelist H. G. Wells; the playwright George Bernard Shaw; and hundreds of others. Nobel Prize winners gave support. Research was backed by the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations. The Cold Springs Harbor Institute was built to carry out this research, but important work was also done at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and Johns Hopkins. Legislation to address the crisis was passed in states from New York to California. 

These efforts had the support of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, and the National Research Council. It was said that if Jesus were alive, he would have supported this effort.

All in all, the research, legislation and molding of public opinion surrounding the theory went on for almost half a century. Those who opposed the theory were shouted down and called reactionary, blind to reality, or just plain ignorant. But in hindsight, what is surprising is that so few people objected. . . 

The theory was eugenics, and its history is so dreadful --- and, to those who were caught up in it, so embarrassing --- that it is now rarely discussed. But it is a story that should be well know to every citizen, so that its horrors are not repeated."

I wanted to make sure that the topic of this appendix was mentioned here at BAM sometime during the month of discussion of this book.   I have strong feelings that we need to review the errors of eugenics periodically to prevent any thoughts that might lead us toward that path again.  Please visit the following website and spend some time at your leisure.  Click HERE.

State of Fear Review

From the book group we had at multiply:

Review of Michael Crichton's State of Fear

By Jeffrey Masters, Ph.D. — Director of Meteorology, Weather Underground, Inc.

The newest Michael Crichton thriller, State of Fear, is a real page turner--in more ways than one, unfortunately. The book starts off in classic Michael Crichton tradition, with the bad guys gathering a baffling set of very specialized and expensive high-tech equipment--hypersonic cavitation generators, wire-guided projectiles, shaped explosives, a deep-diving submersible. They also quietly seek out a mysterious and worrisome collection of information, including data on hurricanes, tsunamis, use of explosives in seismic recordings, and more. As the bodies of those who get in their way begin piling up, it is clear we are dealing with a ruthless, well-organized foe with plans for major high-tech mayhem. The story is exciting and the pages turn quickly as we read on to find out just what kind of mayhem lies ahead. We meet the main character, Michael Evans, a Los Angeles lawyer with an interesting romantic life and a very interesting primary client--millionaire environmental philanthropist George Morton. Morton bankrolls the National Environmental Resource Fund (NERF), an environmental group suing the U.S. on behalf of the island nation of Vanutu for damages caused by Global Warming-induced sea level rises. We watch Michael Evans as he meets the legal and scientific team assembled by NERF to prosecute the sea level rise lawsuit, and here the story really slows down as the NERF team tries to educate Evans about the uncertainties of the Global Warming theory. As you might suspect from the NERF group's name, Crichton is not a fan of environmentalists--nor of the Global Warming theory. As the book progresses, Crichton repeatedly attacks environmentalists and the science behind Global Warming though a series of mock trials that Evans sits though. As the plot and action moves ahead in fits and starts between Global Warming science lectures, we find that the bads guys are a group of eco-terrorists, with possible ties to George Morton's NERF organization. We meet the main hero of the story, Dr. John Kenner, professor of Geoenvironmental Engineering at MIT, and secret agent for an unnamed national security organization. Kenner, along with Evans and two of his romantic interests, relentlessly pursue the baddies to Antarctica, Arizona, and a remote Pacific island infested with cannibals. Kenner also happens to be a brilliant and well-informed critic of Global Warming, and proceeds to "educate" Evans (and the reader) about the truth about Global Warming through a series of conversations throughout the rest of the book. The conversations come complete with page after page of graphs and charts and footnotes. Mixed in with the lectures on Global Warming are formulations of Crichton's more general environmental philosophy--that a new politico-legal-media complex has taken over control from the military industrial complex, and is dedicated to controlling the population by promoting a state of fear about false environmental scares like catastrophic Global Warming. The story finally ends, mercifully, after 567 pages, of which at least 100 are devoted to anti-environmental sermons and Global Warming "education". A full 20 pages of scientific references follow, along with a few pages of the author's comments on his environmental philosophy and what he feels should be done to fix the State of Fear created by the politico-legal-media complex. I give Crichton credit for attempting to weave what is obviously to him a very important bit of personal philosophy into an action-thriller novel. I also give him credit for taking the initiative to educate himself on the Global Warming issue, something that I believe all citizens should do (if you've got 10 minutes, a good place to start is the latest scientific summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a group of over 2000 scientists from 100 countries working under a mandate from the United Nations in the largest peer-reviewed scientific collaboration in history). However, "State of Fear" is a disappointment both as an action-thriller novel, and as a credible source of science on the Global Warming issue. The action is fun when it happens, but is way too bogged down by the excessive sermonizing and "educating" that Crichton interjects at every opportunity in the story. I found myself skipping page after page of his characters' interminable griping to get to the action parts. And Crichton's obvious gloom about the harm excessive environmentalism is doing to the world is reflected in the book, making the mood of the story very dark, and not much fun to read. On a scientific level, Crichton has obviously done a lot of research. The high-tech schemes of the baddies to create fake climate mayhem are all delightfully improbable, but based in fact just enough to leave you wondering if such things are really possible (not!). Unfortunately, Crichton presents a error-filled and distorted version of the Global Warming science, favoring views of the handful of contrarians that attack the consensus science of the IPCC. I list a few of the errors and distortions below: Crichton informs us, "A large high-pressure mass was beginning to rotate, forming the ragged beginnings of a hurricane." This is false, a hurricane forms from a large mass of LOW pressure. Dr. Kenner attacks the notion that extreme weather has increased in the past 15 years, or that Global Warming will cause in increase in extreme weather, noting, "If anything, global warming theory predicts less extreme weather." This is false, global warming theory does not predict less extreme weather. The latest IPCC Assessment Report concludes that we don't know enough to determine if events like hurricanes, tornados, and hailstorms will increase or decrease in frequency due to Global Warming. However, the report does say it is very likely that there will be more intense precipitation events over many areas, and that peak winds and rainfall rates from hurricanes are also likely to be higher. This is a logical result of the fact that a warmer Earth will have increased evaporation from the oceans, and thus more moisture will be available for precipitation. Dr. Kenner asserts that Mt. Kilamanjaro's glaciers are not melting because of global warming, stating: "So why is it melting? Because of deforestation." However, the lead author of the study Crichton cites in the footnote for this assertion stated in a New York Times interview (PDF File) that he objected to his study being used by greenhouse skeptics to portray the melting of Kilimanjaro's glaciers as a "black-and-white picture that says it is either global warming or not global warming". Another author of the study noted that, "Using these preliminary findings to refute or even question global warming borders on the absurd". In a debate about whether the U.S. should sign the Kyoto Protocol to combat Global Warming, Dr. Kenner asks why we should sign a treaty that "won't, in effect, do anything at all?", stating: "The effect of Kyoto would be to reduce warming by .04 degrees Celsius in the year 2100". Again, this assertion has serious problems. The Kyoto Protocol calls for the industrialized countries to cut their greenhouse gas emissions to 5.2% below 1990 emission levels for the period 2005 - 2012. Developing countries do not have to cut emissions. Since the Kyoto treaty expires in 2012, it is absurd to talk about the worth of the Kyoto Protocol by extending it to 2100, assuming no emission control demands will be put on developing countries at some point in the future. A true measure of the Kyoto Protocol's worth must be measured by combining its effect with the effect of new treaties that must be negotiated to succeed Kyoto in 2012. All of the IPCC Assessment Reports have noted the need for greenhouse gas emission cuts of 50% or more by all nations by the mid- to late- 21st century, and little or no emissions by the century's end, to meet the goal of stabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentrations below a doubling of pre-industrial values. Kyoto is a small first step in achieving this goal. Many more flawed or misleading presentations of Global Warming science exist in the book, including those on Arctic sea ice thinning, correction of land-based temperature measurements for the urban heat island effect, satellite vs. ground-based measurements of Earth's warming, and controversies over sea level rise estimates. I will spare the reader additional details. On the positive side, Crichton does emphasize the little-appreciated fact that while most of the world has been warming the past few decades, most of Antarctica has seen a cooling trend. The Antarctic ice sheet is actually expected in increase in mass over the next 100 years, according to the IPCC. Additionally, Crichton correctly points out that there has been no rise in hurricane activity in the Atlantic over the past few decades (a point unchanged by the record four hurricanes that struck Florida in 2004). In a conversation about trying to educate an ignorant environmentalist about the realities of Global Warming, Kenner sums up for me the essence of Crichton's presentation of science in State of Fear: "Her intentions are good," she said. "And her information is bad," Kenner said. "A prescription for disaster." The excessive interruptions of an otherwise good story by Crichton's bad science make State of Fear a bad buy. For further reading... For one of the more balanced and up-to-date views of the controversies surrounding the Global Warming issue, see Dr. Stephen Schneider's web site. Dr. Schneider, one of the world's foremost climate experts, has testified frequently before Congress on environmental issues and is one of the lead authors of the IPCC scientific reports. He has criticized both industry-funded skeptics and environmental groups on their biased treatment of the Global Warming issue. Skeptics have routinely called global warming "a hoax", and attacked the credibility of scientists promoting the idea. Are the skeptics right? To shed light on the issue, it is helpful to review how the same skeptics treated the ozone hole issue. Read the Weather Underground special feature, The Skeptics vs. The Ozone. The latest IPCC summary has an excellent summary of what the best scientists in the field figure we know and don't know about Global Warming.

Are you comfortable?

From the book group we had on Multiply:

This is liable to take some time, so make sure the iron is off and the tea pot is not boiling over, and you may want to turn off the roast in the oven.
When Mary asked me to co-host this book, I figured, why not? Peaceful little piece of fluff by a guy who made a living writing about zoos for dinosaurs, and nano-mobiles to go inside your blood vessels. Entertaining, to be sure, but stories to be taken with a large grain of salt. I envisioned Chrichton with his tongue placed firmly in his teeth, having a good chuckle at those naive to believe that he was a scientist and not just an author.
So along comes State Of Fear and at first I thought it was still tongue in cheek, a parody perhaps of the war between the environmentalists and the industrialists. I thought it was his answer to "Goldfinger" or "Live and Let Die". If you look carefully you will find a wannabe James Bond lurking around the endless cocktail parties saying, "Shaken not stirred."
 At first that is what I thought. Then suddenly, I got this eerie feeling that Crichton had filled his head with so much data supplied by God knows who (although not hard to guess) that he fell into the trap of many a BS artist before him. He forgot where the "shaggy dog story" left off and "truth" began and confused himself and probably a few readers as well.
But that is only my opinions, and as we all know, opinions are like arm pits. Nearly everybody has a couple, and they usually stink.
To fortify my position on this, I called upon a couple of "associates" to get their take on things.
Even though I don't know these guys personally, they don't know that, and the brotherhood of the PhD opens a few doors upon which I was able to capitalize.
The first person I am going to trot out here is Jeffrey Masters, PhD.
Click on his name to glance at his bona fides.
To read what he says about State of Fear, go the BAM Blog entitled "Jeffrey Masters' Review of State of Fear."
Now, if you want to get out your leathers and chains and get down and dirty on this Global Warming issue, I encourage you to visit 
Dr. Stephen Schneider's web site.
Between what he has on his web site, and the multiple hyper-links he offers,you will find everything you needed to know but were afraid to ask about Global Warming and other environmental issues.
Of course if you have already decided that the whole thing a hoax and a scam, yadda, yadda, yadda, then it won't make any difference. For those who believe what these two scholars say, then I am preaching to the choir.
What I am hoping to do is find a few folks who haven't made up their minds based upon propaganda, and hearsay and rhetoric who will look at the math. If the numbers compute, then the decision should be easy.
Co-hosting with Mary has been real and it has been fun, and upon occasion even real fun.
If BAM survives the next 60 days, and the invitation is extended I may come back again to stir up another hornets nest.
Timothy D. Culey, PhD.

Whose Garden Was This?

This could also be called the "Tree Huggers Lament."

Stolen From SPQ - She always posts such neat things!

The Doctor Is Within

Pico Iyer

“Dream — nothing!” is one of the many things I’ve heard the 14th Dalai Lama say to large audiences that seem to startle the unprepared. Just before I began an onstage conversation with him at New York Town’s Hall this spring, he told me, “If I had magical powers, I’d never need an operation!” and broke into guffaws as he thought of the three-hour gallbladder operation he’d been through last October, weeks after being in hospital for another ailment. For a Buddhist, after all, our power lies nowhere but ourselves.
We can’t change the world except insofar as we change the way we look at the world — and, in fact, any one of us can make that change, in any direction, at any moment. The point of life, in the view of the Dalai Lama, is happiness, and that lies within our grasp, our untapped potential, with every breath.

Easy for him to say, you might scoff. He’s a monk, he meditates for four hours as soon as he wakes up and he’s believed by his flock to be an incarnation of a god. Yet when you think back on his circumstances, you recall that he was made ruler of a large and fractious nation when he was only 4 years old. He was facing a civil war of sorts in Lhasa when he was just 11, and when he was 15, he was made full political leader and had to start protecting his country against Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai, leaders of the world’s largest (and sometimes least tractable) nation.

This spring marked the completion of half a century for him in exile, trying to guide and serve 6 million Tibetans he hasn’t seen in 50 years, and to rally 150,000 or so exiled Tibetans who have in most cases never seen Tibet. This isn’t an obvious recipe for producing a vividly contagious optimism.

Yet in 35 years of talking to the Dalai Lama, and covering him everywhere from Zurich to Hiroshima, as a non-Buddhist, skeptical journalist, I’ve found him to be as deeply confident, and therefore sunny, as anyone I’ve met. And I’ve begun to think that his almost visible glow does not come from any mysterious or unique source. Indeed, mysteries and rumors of his own uniqueness are two of the things that cause him most instantly to erupt into warm laughter. The Dalai Lama I’ve seen is a realist (which is what makes his optimism the more impressive and persuasive). And he’s as practical as the man he calls his “boss.”

The Buddha generally presented himself as more physician than metaphysician: if an arrow is sticking out of your side, he famously said, don’t argue about where it came from or who made it; just pull it out. You make your way to happiness not by fretting about it or trafficking in New Age affirmations, but simply by finding the cause of your suffering, and then attending to it, as any doctor (of mind or body) might do.

The first words the Dalai Lama said when he came into exile, I learned not long ago, were “Now we are free.” He had just lost his homeland, his seeming destiny, contact with the people he had been chosen to rule; he had been forced to undergo a harrowing flight for 14 days across the highest mountains in the world. But his first instinct — the result of training and teaching, no doubt, as much as of temperament — was to look at what he could do better. Now.

He could bring democratic and modern reforms to the Tibetan people that he might not so easily have done in old Tibet. He and his compatriots could learn from Western science and other religions, and give something back to them. He could create a new, improved Tibet — global and contemporary — outside Tibet. The very condition that most of us would see as loss, severance and confinement, he saw as possibility.

Not all Tibetans can be quite so sanguine and far-sighted, of course, and in terms of a resolution of Tibet’s political predicament with China, the Dalai Lama has made no visible progress in 50 years. Beijing is only coming down harder and harder on Tibet, as he frankly admits. But when I watch him around the world, I see that he’s visiting other countries and traditions in part to offer concrete, practical tips for happiness, or inner health, the way any physician might when making a house call. Think in terms of enemies, he suggests, and the only loser is yourself.

Concentrate on external wealth, he said at Town Hall, and at some point you realize it has limits — and you’re still feeling discontented. Take his word as law, he constantly implies, and you’re doing him — as well as yourself — a disservice, as you do when assuming that any physician is infallible, or can protect his patients from death in the end.

None of these are Buddhist laws as such — though in his case they arise from Buddhist teaching — any more than the law of universal gravitation is Christian, just because it happened to be formulated by Isaac Newton (who said, “God created everything by number, weight and measure”). I’ve been spending time for 18 years in a Benedictine monastery, and the monks I know there have likewise found out how to be delighted by the smallest birthday cake. Happiness is not pleasure, they know, and unhappiness, as the Buddhists say, is not the same as suffering. Suffering — in the sense of old age, sickness and death — is the law of life; unhappiness is just the position we choose — or can not choose — to bring to it.

Not long ago, I was traveling with the Dalai Lama across Japan and another journalist came into our bullet-train compartment for an interview. “Your Holiness,” he said, “you have seen so much sorrow and loss in your life. Your people have been killed and your country has been occupied. You have had to worry about the welfare of Tibet every day since you were four years old. How can you always remain so happy and smiling?”

”My profession,” said the Dalai Lama instantly, as if he hardly had to think about it. His answer could mean many things, but one of the better things it meant to me was that that kind of happiness is within the reach of almost anyone. We can work on it as we work on our backhands, our soufflés or our muscles in the gym. True happiness, in that sense, doesn’t mean trying to acquire things, so much as letting go of things (our illusions and attachments). It’s only the clouds of short-sightedness or ignorance, the teachers from the Dalai Lama’s tradition suggest, that prevent us from seeing that our essential nature, whether we’re Buddhist or not, is blue sky

Preview of coming attractions

From the book group we had at Multiply:

Mary asked me a couple of months back if I would co-host this month with her in discussing Sate of Fear. I was familiar with the book and the controversy surrounding it when it was first published and even now by those who use it to either debunk their opponents theories or to support their own.
I knew this was going to be a vast project and I didn't want to do it half vast, so I put the "PhD" to work, sent out a few emails, made few phone calls to former associates in the teaching profession, one of whom is the Chief Meteorologist for the State of Louisiana.
I played the Devil's advocate (which never is a good way to win friends and influence people, but it is SOOO much fun, who cares?)
I didn't exactly pit one against the other because it really wasn't necessary. They both gleefully responded addressing the book how it relates to their own ideas and opinions.
I've condensed down what each said to a couple pages each, and before the weekend is out I will put one or maybe both out here and we can really kick the old bladder around the final week of our discussion.
Some people like to think of me as an old curmudgeon, which is cool. I, however like to think of myself as a Diplomat. I love to hear several friends arguing about something, knowing  that they are ALL wrong, yet smile and say nothing.  No wait ... that isn't me. I;ll have to get back to you on that as soon as the weather cools down again and I get back to living in the State of Arkansas instead of the State of Fear.
As we get ready to wrap this sucka up for the month, I would like to take just a moment to run a commercial.
Being an associate-administrator or Co-Administrator can be fun and challenging, but Mary and Annie who are the full time administrators work their Biblical Donkeys off (Alright, Annie, where is the damned apostrophe supposed to go on that word?) They selflessly give of their time and their talent, perhaps ignoring more important things (I haven't heard Annie speak of Starbucks Ice Cream in months, and even though Mary and I had an absolutely delightful dialog about the difference between an 'oral' thermometer' and a 'rectal thermometer,' her being a nurse and all, that was some time ago too.
What? You don't KNOW the difference?. Quite elementary, my dear Watson. "TASTE."
To be quite honest with you, there is some serious discussion about this being the final curtain for BAM unless we can find some others willing to step up the plate and take a cut at the old horsehide.
Mary has listed a number of areas where people are needed to keep this thing running (check out her Notes on the Home Tab).
If you have a little time and a little expertise in any one or more of those areas, please consider helping.
I for one would really hate to see this organization become extinct.
It's bad enough that we lost the Passenger Pigeons, the cute little White Seal Pups and the Whales, and the climate is either getting hotter or colder or stinkier or not and there are so many Liars, or well meaning misinformed folks and lawyers, general folks out there and politicians (the only way to tell for sure if a politician is lying to you is to watch his mouth very carefully. If his lips move when he speaks, he is lying) it would be a shame to lose this forum of free exchange of ideas.
Be a volunteer, give blood .. oh wait, wrong speech, sorry. Do the right thing.
Remember Jesus loves you, and it's a damned good think, because you need all the love you can get!

Book Tuesday - only it is Thursday.

Blow Out

by

Catherine Coulter

From Publishers Weekly

The latest in prolific novelist Coulter's series of FBI thrillers once again features high-powered husband and wife team Dillon Savich and Lacey Sherlock. In the middle of a long-awaited vacation with their young son, the two are called to investigate the heinous midnight murder of a Supreme Court Justice, committed in the Court's library despite tight, round-the-clock security. Known as a moderate, Justice Stewart Califano was undoubtedly contemplating an upcoming case involving the death penalty for psychopathic juveniles when he was brutally garroted, his fingers sliced off as he struggled to escape. The FBI is aided in the case by the CIA, Secret Service and metropolitan police as well as by the judge's stepdaughter, an investigative reporter for the Washington Post. Yet within 48 hours, two of the Justice's young law clerks are murdered in the same grisly fashion—the lovable Daniel strangled with his own St. Christopher medal chain, and the formidable Eliza killed while she's on the phone with Savich. An unrelated supernatural side plot is distracting, and the case's solution comes from out of left field, but fans of the author's fictional duo will get their fix—the climactic face-off takes place in Savich and Sherlock's own living room. 

(This is the audio book I listened to prior to the one I have in the car now.  It was okay but not the most impressive book I ever listened to.   It kept me awake but I felt it was in the class of Harlequin romance as far as the level of reading it was. Click on the author's name to learn more about her and on the title of the book to find where it is available.)

From My E Mail Bag This Tonight - Adults only.

Prior to her trip to Texas , Buffy (a blonde New Yorker), 

confided to her co-workers she had three goals for her trip to the Lone Star State -  

1. She wanted to taste some real Texas Bar-B-Que. 
2. She wanted to take in a bona fide rodeo. And..
3. She wanted to have sex with a real cowboy . 

Upon returning, the girls were curious as to how she fared. 

'Let me tell you, they have a tree down there called a Mesquite and when they slow cook that brisket over that Mesquite , it's ooooh so good. The taste is unbelievable!'

'And I went to a real rodeo. Talk about athletes... Those guys wrestle full grown bulls! They ride horses at a full gallop, then jump off the horses and grab the bull by the horns and throw them to the ground! It is just incredible!' 

They then asked, 'Well tell us , did you have sex with a real cowboy?' 

'Are you kidding? When I saw the outline of the condom they carry in the back pocket of their jeans, I changed my mind!'

Where to we look?

 From the book group we had on Multiply:


Change the expression to "follow the agenda" and you will automatically find the money.
The people with the most money are the ones most motivated to defend their agenda.
Like the Christian man who is hauled into court for beating his kids. He says, "I have to because the Bible says, "Suffer the little children to come unto me." They will be spending a lot of time with Gee-hay-zus if I have my way about it."
He had an "agenda" and nobody is going to prove him wrong because his zealotry won't allow him to change his mind.
It can be summed up mathematically like this.
A = Agenda
B= Money
C= Zealotry
A + B = C. Works every time.  If you have a bunch of zealots, and bunch of money there is a fairly good chance there is an Agenda in there someplace which is there for no other reason than justifying the money and the zealots.
Sometimes those with lots of money can be found working for two or more agendas. Sort of like 'hedging your bets."
 In other words, "I support Agenda A, because I think they will make the most money, If, however it appears that Agenda B might prevail in the long haul, I will put a little money down on it too, just in case." Sometimes the "long shot" pays the best, so it is ok to put a coulple bucks on it just in case the $100 you bet on the favorite turns out to be a loss.
In horse racing it is Win-Place-Show any one of which will return to you varying amounts of money depending on which position and how much you "invest" and the odds. In any case your choice to support a particular animal probably has little  to do with how happy you are that somebody is taking the time to give him a little exercise, or how somebody is gathering up all the road apples to grown rice in Bengladesh or to turn into alternative fuel for your car. You simply want him to run the fastest, or at least fast enough to come in at least in Place or Show.
So, if you have the money, why not invest some in Exxon Corporation, but also in Greenpeace and the manufactures of solar panels and bio-fuel auto engines? Even if one or two go belly up, you've got you're money hedged in the other one.
What is your agenda? Is it continued use of fossil fuels. Sure. Is it "Save the Rain Forest" Sure! Is it "Green Fuel? Sure. Why not! One of them is bound to win. Which one wins is irrelevant so long as I personally win.
Don't confuse "agenda" with "ethics" or "morality" or "doing the right thing,"
The issue is really "profit." no matter what your agenda.

Debunk or not debunk......

From the book group we had on Multiply:

.....ah, that truly is the question.
CO-Admin Comments:
Once again the term "agenda" surfaces. When Crichton first wrote "State of Fear" the so-called experts lined up according to their own "agenda." The difficulty in making an independent decision about global warming is akin to discussing Muhammad or Buddha  among a group of Christians, or discussing Christ among the non-Christian. The information each party brings to the table is based upon his own beliefs and his own "agenda." If you see something that supports your belief system, naturally you will trot it out and wave it frantically for all to see. If you see something that doesn't support your position, you tend to either ignore it or debunk it as "faulty research."
Religions of the world all operate on an agenda. Many of the Christian faith believe that their personal salvation is based almost entirely on how many others they can convince of the "error of their ways" and convert them to Christianity, or a different 'brand' of Christianity.
I wonder if God has a score card: Converting one Catholic to Pentecostal is worth 3 points, converting one Jew is worth 5 points, converting one guy out of the Jungle is worth 2 points, etc.
If you choose to participate you will learn what it takes to score the most points.
Of course none of us on the planet will ever know the whole truth. It is based upon "faith."
In my personal opinion, Global Warming is the exact same thing.
If paper A scientifically proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Global Warming exists, papers B, C & D will debunk paper A and cite "faulty data" or "manipulation of the data."
The people who wrote Position A get paid for doing it by those who want the data to show that (so they can sell the data to others who want to use it to support their agenda.)
The people who write B, C & D get paid for doing it by those who want the data to show that (so they can sell the data to others who want to use it to support their agenda.)
The key word here is "AGENDA."
If you are a petro-chemical company, your "Agenda" is to disprove Global Warming so you can continue to drill and produce your products for sale.,
If you are an Environmentalist, you want to  prove Global Warming exists so you can continue to sell that idea to people who make monetary contributions to your cause.
If you build solar heating panels, you likely will in competition with the folks who sell gas or coal fired furnaces, whichever side you are on, there will be scientific data to support your claim.
If paper A says, "Water freezes at 32 deg. F or 0 Celsius," you can bet that those who disagree will show that they have temps taken of sea water that is 24 deg F., and still liquid, and ice that is 5 deg Celsius and still frozen.
So then the people of paper A have to come back and debunk the research techniques of B, C & D.
In both cases, money changes hands.
Some say the true scientists are selling their souls to the devil for 30 pieces of silver. Maybe so, but if you are willing to hire me to write a paper on something that can neither be proved or disproved, and I can take those 30 pieces of silver and use them to help my research on a cure for cancer or diabetes ... well no harm no foul.
Scientists and non-scientists alike will ultimately have to wait for the "rapture" to know the truth.
The difficulty in the issue of Global Warming is the time factor.,
Let’s face it, we humans are barely beyond the stage of single cell fetus when it comes to the age of the planet. We are the first bud of grass growing next to the Sequoias and the Redwoods telling the world all about them and their branches and leaves which live hundreds of feet above us.
A large amount of what we "know" about the changes in our environment is akin to making pronouncements about changes in education based upon how many preschooler know red from green this year compared to last year in one classroom, in one school, in one city, in one state in the United States in the whole world. Naaaaaaaaaaaack! Sorry, that's incorrect, have a seat..
The time frame from which we draw our data and our samples is so limited we are essentially guessing.
Some say, "We have proof that the overall temperature of the planet has increased by 0.5 F in the past 100 years," and write scientific position papers based upon that data.
But 100 years is not much time in the overall scheme of things.
I think I have some socks that are nearly that old.
How can we be certain that we are not on the trailing edge of a naturally occurring environmental change that happens every 50,000 years, 100,000 years, 1,000,000 years?
So, my position on the issue is "wait and see." Is the climate heading for a disaster? Should we all begin carrying signs, "Repent, the end is near?" And when it does end, who will we see? Buddha or Jesus?
I'm not on either side. I have high regard for the environmental movement and the work they do. But I am also a pragmatist. Our very existence on this planet always has been supply & demand. You get hungry enough, and get your arm ripped off trying to have a fist fight with a sabre toothed tiger, you will learn to develop a weapon to help you out. Bye, bye Sabre toothed tiger.
When you decide there is a connection to days of being sick as a pterodactyl after eating raw tiger meat, you discover fire. Bye Bye forests.
When you discover that there is a demand for beautiful, fine white fur, Bye Bye Arctic seals. When you discover there is a demand for blubber, Bye Bye Whales.
Want to save the seals and the whales, take away the demand. Want to save the environment, take away the demand for fossil based fuels. That is the only way to stop the feuding and the arguments.
Who can argue when a man feeds his family by clubbing baby seals to death,, or shoots harpoons into whales? Who can argue with a man who feeds his family working on an off shore oil platform?
Want to stop that, stop the demand and find him alternative employment.
Everyone who has ever dropped a line into a trout stream knows there is always a hook involved.
Timothy D. Culey, PhD.
(I add the "PhD" on there not to brag or intimidate so much as to prove that a PhD doesn't mean squat in the total scheme of things. If anything it has taught me to be damned careful when I use it and with whom. The last thing in world I need is for somebody to quote me in support of a position to which I may not necessarily agree.
You, the members of BAM,  know as much as I do about Global Warming (and probably everything else.) The only difference is that it took a lot  more time in the classroom for me to learn what I don't know.

From My E Mail Bag This Evening

(Seriously dont look ahead this really tells who you look up to amazing!!!)
 
WHO IS YOUR PERFECT ROLE MODEL?

Please don't look ahead until you complete this.  I did this exercise myself and cant believe that it actually matched me with a person Ive always admired.
This is very short, but you might need pencil & paper or calculator to figure.
1)  Pick your favorite number between 1-9.
2)  Multiply by 3.
3)  Add 3. Then again Multiply by 3 (I'll wait while you get the calculator....)
4)  You'll get a 2 or 3 digit number.
5) Now add those two digits together.
Match your final number with the numbered ROLE MODEL in the list below.  It will reveal the person you most admire and wish to imitate.
Now scroll down.... 









 
1. Albert Einstein
2. Nelson Mandela
3. Abraham Lincoln
4. Helen Keller
5. Bill Gates
6. Mahatma Gandhi
7. Mother Theresa
8. Thomas Edison
9  Skeezicks
10. Chuck Norris

A Poem For This Week

Spring Cleaning

by

Joanne Seltzer

Thanks to my husband I support myself

by caring for an oversized doll house

that I love and hate and wish would collapse

into a heap of building supplies.  If

you come up with a better word than housewife

I'll wear it.  In the meantime, call me Ms.

Not MRS.  Haven't I the right to choose 

my own name?  Though I don't control my life,

allow me at least an identity.

not Miss.   Not Madame.  Like a ManuScript,

a Motor Ship, a Master of Science

or memoriae sacrum:  the memory 

of a divine but vulnerable spirit

damaged by elbow grease and compliance. 

(I found this in "If I Had a Hammer:  Woman's Work" by Sandra Martz.  Click on the poet's name to learn more about her.  Even though my current schedule prohibits me in joining in with the Poetry Wednesday Group,  I still plan to post a poem every couple of weeks here at MP.)

State of Fear II

From the book group we had on Multiply:


I hope everyone had a safe Independence day ... State of Fear is a good book to read while you sunbathe next to the pool. The issues of Global Warming and Greenhouse Effect might take on a whole new meaning.
Be sure you have plenty of sun block. Having a nice tan at 20 is not worth melanoma at 50!
When Crichton first published this book, there was a fire storm of controversy, from both sides. Some felt that the "story" was simply a ruse on his part to sermonize on his belief systems, the book is just entertainment and shouldn't be taken any more seriously than Jurassic Part or the Andromeda Strain.
On the other hand there are those who think that a plethora of footnotes, charts, graphs and bibliography prove his theory.
Is it fiction meant to entertain? Or is it a scientific position paper?
Is there a clear line in the sand where fiction and reality are separated, or are they all jumbled together as if a wave has come ashore and blurred the boundaries?
Read on ....

State of Fear

From the book group we had on Multiply:


Thank you Mary for inviting me to co-host the blog for State of Fear.
This book, although written several years ago, is still timely in it's approach to the great conflict that rages still between the ecologists,  the environmental groups and the industrialists. One group talks of "green house effect" and "global warming" and the others say, "Nonsense ... your data is faulty."
Micheal Crichton seems to overwhelm us with footnotes and bibliography, making this seem more like a text book rather than a piece of fiction. As individual readers we have to take a side as to what is real and what is fiction, what we are willing to believe, what we are not and from whom.
The one thing we have in our favor is the passage of time since the book was first published. As we read it, we must factor in what we know now that we didn't when the book was written.
We will have to decide if the intervening years and the availability of information on the internet alters the concepts introduced in the book one way or another.
Have fun!