looking for a beating, er help

General Discussion
1

Now that I’m too old for the carpentry handyman stuff, I’ve been very tentatively trying to reach out to some editors thinking it would be nice start getting a little cash out of these endless hours I spend writing. Then a couple days back I received a response that invited me to send in a ‘pitch.’ I’ve always tended to write in response to things I read that have upset me, or trying to enunciate what’s happening within me or my perspective on the world.

Never pitched a column to FCFP, she liked what I wrote, once in a while she’d offer a concise suggestion which I’d incorporate that was about it, and then it would get printed. I’ve had a few days to think about it and this morning composed something. I’ve no idea how it comes across, but figured I might find out by sharing it. See what you folks who are at least familiar with me think.

Let me have your best shot, beat the poop out of it, if it deserves it.

Thank you for taking the time to send me your email. Not being of the trade, I’ll admit your invitation for a “pitch” caught me flat footed and I needed to mull it over for a while.

Of course, first off, what am I pitching?

If I’m pitching myself and why I’m worth you taking an interest in me and my writing, I would have to say it starts with my expectations: If we aren’t changing minds, we are failing!

Then there’s my focus as summarized in a concise “manifesto” I’ve recently composed:

“We The People have a moral ethical right - along with a pragmatic need - to learn what scientists have learned about this planet’s biosphere and climate engine without constant dishonest crossfire.

We should not tolerate serious scientists always being drown out by amoral, dishonest, too often slanderous and frankly childishly ignorant arguments - that an astoundingly ruthless PR factory repeats over and over again, without ever learning a damned thing from the evidence in front of us.”

If you’ve read “Merchants of Doubt” you know that over the past decades, the sowing of doubt towards serious science through deception has evolved into a high art-form wielded with vicious ruthlessness and success. I’ve been paying attention since the ‘70s and it seems to me all the while the Left has given Faith-Shackled thinking a free pass.

I believe a big reason for that is because most lefties are ill-equipped to explain the difference between science and religion, and frightened to take on life, death, afterlife issues. Which is a shame, because we should be vigorously confronting those beliefs, not with attacks so much as with simple sound arguments, that encourage doubt, which will doubtless grow, if only most liberals were themselves aware of reality’s nuances.

I’m talking about constructive nudges to force some changes and evolution in perceptions, after all the cognitive dissonance must be getting astounding within those Faith-shackled minds.

I can say that “I am an Earth Centrist,” then explain what that means and why it’s important and how it touches on our hearts and spiritual needs and daily life.


If I were making a pitch for an article, I’d offer the kernel of what I’m trying to convey, and ask how many words will you give me and how personal (or not) would you want it?

 

… The missing key is appreciating the fundamental “Magisteria of Physical Reality,” and recognizing both science and religion are products of the “Magisteria of Our Mindscape.”

Science seeks to objectively learn about our physical world, but we should still recognize all our understanding is embedded within and constrained by our Mindscape.

Religion is all about the human Mindscape itself, with its wonderful struggles, fears, spiritual undercurrents, needs and stories we create to give our live’s meaning and make it worth living, or at least bearable.

What’s the point?

Science, religions, heaven, hell, political beliefs, even God, they are all products of the human Mindscape, generations of imaginings built upon previous generations of imaginings, all the way down.

>>> That's not to say they are the same thing.  They are not!

Both are equally valid and necessary human endeavors, but they are fundamentally, qualitatively different.

Religion deals with the inside of our minds, hearts, souls and personal struggles.

Science does its best to objectively understand the physical world beyond our ego’s.

Here we are, 2018, sober assessment of physical facts is out of fashion and fantasy thinking in the service of ruthless avarice is in.

Now it literally threatening to topple USA’s government Of The People, By The People, and For The People, in favor of a Me First, power and profits are more important than anything, oligarch run machine.

Well, unless an awful lot of side-liners start getting engaged in our democratic process.

All the while the actual physical creation outside of our conceited little minds keeps on unfolding, following well understood geophysical rules regardless.

Ignore at our own peril.

http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/2019/04/citizenschallenge-why-you-earth-centrist.html

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/2018/09/key-to-gould-nonoverlapping-magisteria.html

If I were to make a pitch for a monthly column, I would repeat my “manifesto” and then explain that I have spent over a decade seeking out climate science contrarians to debate, yet after lively starts, they consistently run away to hide.

Thus, I’ve had to resort to Virtual Debates whereby I quote their transcripts and respond to claims made. My response is a combination of dissecting the rhetorical tricks of their trade, while explaining Earth’s climate complexities that are being deliberately hidden from their audience. Along with offering copious links back to actual experts on the topic at hand.

So far they win by ignoring me, since I am invisible. Give me a little visibility.

I would love nothing more than to have a monthly column to dissect some latest contrarian con-job. You can review my blog for a look at past examples:

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/p/hall-of-shame.html


I have only taken a few writing courses over the decades, so I understand my work is rough, but I also believe in tough love critique, hurt feelings be damned.  I am ready to buckle down and get more serious, but need outside support and guidance to take it to the next level.

Thank you for your time and consideration.  Please let me know how I can prove myself to you.

Sincerely,</blockquote>
&nbsp;
2

Lost some of the indents that helped with clarity,

 

Have at it pals.

3

The section below has some probs. I will put possible edits in bold.

–Now it is literally threatening to topple the USA’s government Of The People, By The People, and For The People, in favor of a Me First, power-and-profits-are-more-important-than-anything, oligarch run machine. (Well, unless an awful lot of side-liners start getting engaged in our democratic process.)–

I put the last phrase in parentheses because it is technically a sentence fragment, but you could edit it in some other way.

 

4

Okay, thank you, it makes sense.

But you know I mean way more than that. Though any grammatical corrections are always much appreciated.

How does it flow? What’s the impression it gives you? Does it leave you clearly understanding what I’m thinking? Is it coherent, rational? Does it sell? :wink:

5

Is the entire thing within the quote block the pitch? I get the gist of what you’re saying, but I have no idea what this person is looking for, so I’m hesitant to critique.

6

Thanks.

Maybe this is clearer.

 

Thank you for taking the time to send me your email. Not being of the trade, I’ll admit your invitation for a “pitch” caught me flat footed and I needed to mull it over for a few days.

I have and my first question is what am I pitching?

I’m not sure what you’re looking for. Please accept these three distinct pitches.

If I’m pitching myself and why I’m worth you taking an interest in me and my writing, I would start with my baseline expectation: “If we aren’t changing minds, we are failing!”

My “manifesto” (tongue in check, for sure) summarizes the undercurrent in much of what I’m writing about:

“We The People have a moral ethical right - along with a pragmatic need - to learn what scientists have learned about this planet’s biosphere and climate engine without constant dishonest crossfire.

We should not tolerate serious scientists always being drown out by amoral, dishonest, too often slanderous and frankly childishly ignorant arguments - that an astoundingly ruthless PR factory repeats over and over again, without ever learning a damned thing from the evidence in front of us.”

If you’ve read “Merchants of Doubt” you know that over the past decades, the sowing of doubt towards serious science through deception has evolved into a high art-form wielded with vicious ruthlessness and the biggest megaphone money can buy with much success.

I’ve been paying attention since the ‘70s and it seems to me all the while the Left has given Evangelical Faith-Shackled thinking a free pass. This has lead to their becoming an easily manipulated very powerful, and emotionally supercharged voting block.

I believe a big reason for that is because most lefties are ill-equipped to explain the difference between science and religion, and too timid to take on life, death, afterlife issues.

That is a shame, because we should be vigorously confronting nonsensical beliefs like an afterlife and heaven or hell, or the notion that any petty self-serving human can ever be in a position to pretend they know God’s Will. Our individual human experiences with a God, whatever that may be, is the most intimate relationship in our human lives, it is non-transferable.

When are we going to start challenging that destructive self-certain childishness? They’ve been victim to these past decades of free reign for Prosperity Doctrine Preachers who have learned to pimp Jesus’ memory for power and profit.

Not with attacks, so much as with fundamental simple sound challenges and arguments. Why not encourage then to doubt their faith - after all it is built on fantasy thinking that demands a willful ignorance towards physical reality.

I’m talking about constructive nudges to force some self-reflection and evolution in perceptions, after all the cognitive dissonance must be getting astounding within those brainwashed Faith-shackled minds.

I can say that “I am an Earth Centrist,” then explain what that means and why it’s important and how it touches on our world outlook, our hearts and spiritual needs as we deal with our day to days.


<strong>If I were making a pitch for an article</strong>, I’d offer the following summary and ask how many words will you give me and how personal (or not) would you want it?

&nbsp;

… The missing key is appreciating the fundamental “Magisteria of Physical Reality,” and recognizing both science and religion are products of the “Magisteria of Our Mindscape.”

Science seeks to objectively learn about our physical world, but we should still recognize all our understanding is embedded within and constrained by our Mindscape.

Religion is all about the human Mindscape itself, with its wonderful struggles, fears, spiritual undercurrents, needs and stories we create to give our live’s meaning and make it worth living, or at least bearable.

What’s the point?

Science, religions, heaven, hell, political beliefs, even God, they are all products of the human Mindscape, generations of imaginings built upon previous generations of imaginings, all the way down.

&gt;&gt;&gt; Not to say they are the same thing.  They are not!

Both are equally valid and necessary human endeavors, but they are fundamentally and qualitatively different.

Religion deals with the inside of our minds, hearts, souls and personal struggles.

Science does its best to objectively understand the physical world beyond our ego’s.

Here we are, 2018, sober assessment of physical facts is out of fashion and fantasy thinking in the service of ruthless avarice is in.

Now it literally threatening to topple USA’s government Of The People, By The People, and For The People, in favor of a Me First, power and profits are more important than anything, oligarch run machine.

Well, unless an awful lot of side-liners start getting engaged in our democratic process.

All the while the actual physical creation outside of our conceited little minds keeps on unfolding, following well understood geophysical rules regardless.

Ignore at our own peril.

http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/2019/04/citizenschallenge-why-you-earth-centrist.html

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/2018/09/key-to-gould-nonoverlapping-magisteria.html

If I were to make a pitch for a monthly column, I would repeat my “manifesto” and then explain that I have spent over a decade seeking out climate science contrarians to debate, yet after lively starts, they consistently run away to hide.

Thus, I’ve had to resort to Virtual Debates whereby I quote their transcripts and respond to claims made. My response is a combination of dissecting the rhetorical tricks of their trade, while explaining Earth’s climate complexities that are being deliberately hidden from their audience. Along with offering copious links back to actual experts on the topic at hand.

So far they win by ignoring me, since I am invisible. Give me a little visibility.

I would love nothing more than to have a monthly column to dissect some recent contrarian con-job articles or YouTube videos.

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/p/hall-of-shame.html


I have only taken a few writing courses over the decades, so I understand my work is rough, but I also believe in tough love critique, hurt feelings be damned.  Meaning, I’m ready to buckle down and get more serious, but I need outside guidance and support to take it to the next level.

Thank you for your time and consideration.  Please let me know how I can prove myself to you.

Sincerely,</blockquote>
7

That flowed much better for me, each section, starting with the “IF” was neatly demarcated and you built your conclusions on premises. You give a teaser for what you could talk about and enough introduction to show there is lots more there. We’ve argued about those details before, but that’s not what you’re looking for here. So, just a few words and phrases will tidy it up nicely I believe.
At the point where you ask the question about when should we start challenging, then answer it with “not with attacks”, I had to stop and figure out that was your response to your own question. Something preceding that, like “the answer should…” or something would help there.
Near the top you say, “tongue in check”. I know what “tongue in cheek” means but it doesn’t seem to fit there, so not sure what to do with that.
“Encourage then” looks like it should be “encourage them”.
2018 s/b 2019. Cut and paste error?

8

Take out that “manifesto” sentence, altogether. Replace it with "My personal mission statement is “____________________.” Make your mission statement short and accurate, like Coca Cola’s which is “Beat Pepsi”. Maybe “To confront the deceit of the climate change denial industry.” or something more accurate to you, maybe even more succinct.

Also, I imagine over the years, like me on this forum, have learned to pack what I want to convey into the most concise way possible. That is, edit out non-essential bits that don’t contribute overall in some important way. Maybe get your best draft together, wait a period of time and go thru it again.

This job/task/whatever it is, sounds like something you will be great at.

9

Thank you Lausten, Tim, that’s helpful advice

.

 

 

10
We’ve argued about those details before
Oh yeah, thinking about Faith-shackled quite a bit, I have been.

In particular, the underlying premise to, the objection that one don’t get anywhere with ideological opponents, unless one stokes them and slides it in there nice and easy, add some oil if necessary. The more I think about that and how nice it seems and feels - the reality of the past few decades has shown us something else.

The nice and easy just gets ignored because they are on there self-conceived GOD GIVEN MISSION.

 

I’m thinking perhaps it’s time for some spiritual confrontation

It’s damned past the time for society to ask them WHO THE HELL ARE YOU TO TALK FOR GOD!!!

No human has that key, yet liberals and progressive and children of the intellectual enlightenment - silently condone that insanity every day we are silent.

As for heaven and hell, why not discuss the end of life and US and how that’s ok - being part of the fabric is pretty satisfying too

 

I think I know why we are silent, fundamentally we’re not comfortable with the great spiritual questions, because we have no answers - when the answers are actually rather simple and straightforward for anyone who actually seeks. It’s a matter of adjusting our intellectual spiritual lens and refocusing.

 

{Maddy is calling, see ya}

Why not publicly and loudly dissect and force them to look at all the ways they avoid PHYSICAL REALITY (let alone humanitarian realities)

11
Why not publicly and loudly dissect and force them to look at all the ways they avoid PHYSICAL REALITY (let alone humanitarian realities)
Because I don't think you can do that. As soon as you start "forcing" someone to do anything, a casual observer from afar will see the forcing and not the underlying crimes of the one being forced. And most people are casual observers. Atheists technically lost the Scopes Monkey Trial, but had a partial victory in making their case heard to a wide audience, but then what happened? Evangelicals went quiet, built their community locally until one day Billy Graham is in the White House. They built that partially on martyrdom, claiming to be the voice in the wilderness and pointing out how atheists are tearing apart the fabric of America, using random and wrong data .

What’s the old saying about “don’t try to out-lie the liar”. A good liar can spot a lie, so if you try to out do them, they will immediately expose you. Cries of “well he lied first” will not support your case. Science isn’t science if it isn’t proceeding at the pace of science. It’s not designed to out maneuver lies and blind faith and bad science. It can only present good science and leave it to others to use that information appropriately. That can include some marketing for how well science is working, like showing that they actually made the blind to see and the lame to walk but you can’t force anyone to read studies and review the methodology and determine that prayer has never been proven to work.

12

Lausten, I believe you misunderstand me, I was just blowing steam there. In fact since writing that I decidedly stayed away from all this, let it settle out a bit, till about half our ago. I sure don’t apologize for being upset at what we’ve allowed these past decades.

As for what’s possible and what’s not, all we need to do is look at the trumpster movement.

Besides, nothing else is working.

Besides, in the end this is just me trying to cope with being witness to society’s self-destruction and the a foreknowledge of the hell hole of a world we are creating for my younger loved ones.

Thanks for the advice Lausten and Tim - all patty-cake stuff, but that’s cool, very helpful just the same. Although I guess that would really be up to you to judge:

 

Thank you for taking the time to send me your email. Not being of the trade I’ll admit your invitation for a “pitch” caught me flat footed and I needed to mull it over for a few days.

I’m not sure what you’re looking for, so I’m offering three distinct pitches.

If I’m pitching myself and why I’m worth you taking an interest in my writing, I would start with my attitude, “If we aren’t changing minds, we’re failing!”

Then there’s the mission statement I created to explain my position:

“We The People have a moral ethical right - along with a pragmatic need - to learn what scientists have learned about this planet’s biosphere and climate engine without constant dishonest crossfire.

We should not tolerate serious scientists always being drown out by amoral, dishonest, too often slanderous and frankly childishly ignorant arguments - that an astoundingly ruthless GOP PR factory repeats over and over again, without ever learning a damned thing from the evidence in front of us.”

“Sowing Doubt” towards serious science through deception and the normalization of ‘Faith over Fact’ has evolved into a high art-form wielded with ruthlessness and the biggest megaphone the GOP can buy. (see Merchants of Doubt for a historical recounting)

I’ve been paying attention since the ‘70s, all the while enlightened society has acquiesced and given foolish self-delusional thinking, such as the conceit that a petty human can know God Almighty or her Will.

Why aren’t we allowed to point out that Heaven and Hell can only exist within our own minds (except where we create it ourselves here on Earth.)

What’s wrong with expecting humanity to comes to grips with the fact that after we die, our bodies and spirits are absorbed right back into Earth and the endless pageant of evolution. We have this moment and then comes the endless sleep and it is good!

The normalization of self-serving fantasy-thinking, over the sober and honest review of information and facts, has lead to our current crisis. I’ve spent decades wondering why have they had such a free reign with such juvenile, ignorance arguments and thinking?

I want to challenge that destructive self-certain willful ignorance. Not with attacks, so much as with fundamental simple sound challenges and arguments - along with asking why dishonesty has become okay. Why not start encouraging then to doubt their “Faith.” If nothing else, it’ll give folks on my side food for thought.

I’ve come to realize our individual human experiences with God, whatever that may be, is the most intimate relationship in our human lives, it is non-transferable.

I can say that “I am an Earth Centrist,” then explain what that means and why it’s important. How it touches our world outlook, along with our hearts and spiritual needs, as we deal with our day to days in an unforgiving material world.


If I were making a pitch for an article, I’d offer the following summary and ask how many words will you give me and how personal (or not) would you want it?

&nbsp;

… The missing key is appreciating the fundamental “Magisteria of Physical Reality,” and recognizing both science and religion are products of the “Magisteria of Our Mindscape.”

Science seeks to objectively learn about our physical world, but we should still recognize all our understanding is embedded within and constrained by our Mindscape.

Religion is all about the human Mindscape itself, with its wonderful struggles, fears, spiritual undercurrents, needs and stories we create to give our live’s meaning and make it worth living, or at least bearable.

What’s the point?

Science, religions, heaven, hell, political beliefs, even God, they are all products of the human Mindscape, generations of imaginings built upon previous generations of imaginings, all the way down.

&gt;&gt;&gt; Not to say they are the same thing.  They are not!

Both are equally valid and necessary human endeavors, but they are fundamentally and qualitatively different.

Religion deals with the inside of our minds, hearts, souls and personal struggles.

Science does its best to objectively understand the physical world beyond our own ego’s.

Here we are, 2018, sober assessment of physical facts is out of fashion and fantasy thinking in the service of ruthless avarice is in.

Now it literally threatening to topple USA’s government Of The People, By The People, and For The People, in favor of a Me First, power and profits are more important than anything, oligarch run machine.

Well, unless an awful lot of side-liners start getting engaged in our democratic process.

All the while the actual physical creation outside of our conceited little minds keeps on unfolding, following well understood geophysical rules regardless.

citizenschallenge.blogspot   com/2019/04/citizenschallenge-why-you-earth-centrist.html

confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot   com/2018/09/key-to-gould-nonoverlapping-magisteria.html

If I were to make a pitch for a monthly column, I would like to go where the wheels of faith-based delusional thinking hit the blacktop of reality. The Climate Science contrarian community’s outpouring of coordinated malicious fraud.

I have spent decades seeking out climate science contrarians to debate, yet after many lively starts, they consistently run away to hide. Thus, I’ve had to resort to Virtual Debates whereby I quote their transcripts and respond to claims made.

My response is a combination of dissecting the rhetorical tricks of their trade, while explaining Earth’s climate complexities that are being deliberately hidden from their audience. Along with offering copious links back to actual experts on the topic at hand.

So far they win by ignoring me, since I am invisible. Give me a little visibility.

I would love nothing more than to have a monthly column dedicated to dissecting selections of the endless firehose of ignorance dependent contrarian fraud showing up in articles and YouTube videos.

confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot com/p/in-nutshell-jim-steele-proposes-that.html

confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot com/p/hall-of-shame.html


I have only taken a few writing courses over the decades, so I understand my work is rough, but I work at it, and I believe in tough critique, hurt feelings be damned.  Meaning, I’m ready to buckle down and get more serious, but I need outside feedback and support to take it to the next level.

Thank you for your time and consideration.  Please let me know how I can prove myself to you.

Sincerely,

Further background,

&nbsp;

https://fourcornersfreepress.com/columns/

I do some blogging,

citizenschallenge.blogspot

confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot

whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot

Durango Telegraph - Caught Red-handed stealing land - April 4, 2019

no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot

Reflections On Justice Sotomayor’s Confirmation Process

citizenschallenge.blogspot   /2009/08/reflections-on-justice-sotomayors.html

An Essay Concerning Our Weather

Humanist; November 1995

http:       //connection.ebscohost  com/c/articles/9511065740/essay-concerning-our-weather</blockquote>
needed to disconnect links  ;-)
13

Fortunately in the note to her, I’ve got indents and such to help separate the text better than that pile up

14

Okay, writing out that first pitch was good to help me figure out my own motivations for this step. After all I do spend plenty of time thinking through what in the world it is I’m trying to do. But, as my wife pointed out she’s an editor asking for a writing pitch.

So I’ll be offering only two pitches and I’ll be saving the first one for something else, possibly rework it into a column. So we’ll just keep this between us. :wink:

15

Patty cake stuff? C’mon’ man, I bakin’ a cake as fast as I can.

Anyway, good luck in your endeavor, you deserve it.

16

Thank you for taking the time to send me your email. Not being of the trade I’ll admit your invitation for a “pitch” caught me flat footed and I needed to mull it over for a few days.

I’m not sure what you’re looking for, so I’m offering two distinct pitches.

If I were making a pitch for an article, I’d offer the following summary and ask how many words will you give me and how personal (or not) would you want it?

 

… The missing key is appreciating the fundamental “Magisteria of Physical Reality,” and recognizing both science and religion are products of the “Magisteria of Our Mindscape.”

Science seeks to objectively learn about our physical world, but we should still recognize all our understanding is embedded within and constrained by our Mindscape.

Religion is all about the human Mindscape itself, with its wonderful struggles, fears, spiritual undercurrents, needs and stories we create to give our live’s meaning and make it worth living, or at least bearable.

What’s the point?

Science, religions, heaven, hell, political beliefs, even God, they are all products of the human Mindscape, generations of imaginings built upon previous generations of imaginings, all the way down.

>>> Not to say they are the same thing. They are not!

Both are equally valid and necessary human endeavors, but they are fundamentally and qualitatively different.

Religion deals with the inside of our minds, hearts, souls and personal struggles.

Science does its best to objectively understand the physical world beyond our own egos’.

Here we are, 2018, sober assessment of physical facts is out of fashion and fantasy thinking in the service of ruthless avarice is in.

Now it literally threatening to topple USA’s government Of The People, By The People, and For The People, in favor of a Me First, power and profits are more important than anything, oligarch run machine.

Well, unless an awful lot of side-liners start getting engaged in our democratic process.

All the while the actual physical creation outside of our conceited little minds keeps on unfolding, following well understood geophysical rules regardless.

http:// citizenschallenge.blogspot com/2019/04/citizenschallenge-why-you-earth-centrist.html

https:// confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot com/2018/09/key-to-gould-nonoverlapping-magisteria.html


<strong>If I were to make a pitch for a monthly column</strong>, I would like to go where the wheels of faith-based delusional thinking hits the blacktop of reality.  The Climate Science contrarian community’s outpouring of coordinated malicious fraud.

I have spent decades seeking out climate science contrarians to debate, yet after many lively starts, they consistently run away to hide. Thus, I’ve had to resort to Virtual Debates whereby I quote their transcripts and respond to claims made.

My response is a combination of dissecting the rhetorical tricks of their trade, while explaining Earth’s climate complexities that are being deliberately hidden from their audience.  Along with offering copious links back to actual experts on the topic at hand.

So far they win by ignoring me, since I am invisible.  Give me a little visibility.

I would love nothing more than to have a monthly column dedicated to dissecting selections of the endless firehose of ignorance dependent contrarian fraud showing up in articles and YouTube videos.

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/p/in-nutshell-jim-steele-proposes-that.html

https://confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot.com/p/hall-of-shame.html

I’m not schooled in writing and understand my work is rough, but I keep striving to improve, I believe in tough critique, hurt feelings be damned. Meaning, I’m ready to buckle down and get more serious, but I need outside feedback and support to take it to the next level.

I have a third pitch, I have been proactively keeping up on climate science, along with Earth sciences and Evolution since the early ’70s. I would love an opportunity to be a climate science researcher, since I have the background to find facts and articles and to put them into the context of our living Earth and daily lives.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Please let me know how I can prove myself to you.

Sincerely,

 

Further background,

 

https:// fourcornersfreepress com/columns/

I do some blogging,

http:// citizenschallenge.blogspot com

https:// confrontingsciencecontrarians.blogspot com

http:// whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot com

Durango Telegraph - Caught Red-handed stealing land - April 4, 2019

http:// no-villageatwolfcreek.blogspot com/2019/04/caught-red-handed-stealing-land-vwc.html

Reflections On Justice Sotomayor’s Confirmation Process

http:// citizenschallenge.blogspot com/2009/08/reflections-on-justice-sotomayors.html

An Essay Concerning Our Weather

Humanist; November 1995

http:// connection.ebscohost com/c/articles/9511065740/essay-concerning-our-weather

17

:slight_smile:

18

Here’s a quote from Betrand Russell that adds a bit of scholarship to our “debate”, CC;

“Social cohesion is a necessity, and mankind has never yet succeeded in enforcing cohesion by merely rational arguments. Every community is exposed to two opposite dangers: ossification through too much discipline and reverence for tradition, on the one hand; on the other hand, dissolution, or subjection to foreign conquest, through the growth of individualism and personal independence that makes cooperation impossible"

I found this at the end of Haidt’s “The Righteous Mind”. The important lesson for me from this book is, the value of reasoned, rational thinking that grew out of the Enlightenment has never fulfilled its promise to create cohesive nations that base all their decisions on evidence. This can’t be blamed totally on the type of thinking that preceded it without arriving at a point where you are talking about human nature, knowing that we don’t fully understand what that is.

 

19
This can’t be blamed totally on the type of thinking that preceded it without arriving at a point where you are talking about human nature, knowing that we don’t fully understand what that is.
Hmmm? Can you unpack that?
20

I was afraid you might ask that. I was so proud of that compact little quote.

Try rolling the clock back, see where it goes. Before Darwin, we didn’t have a solid theory for where our instincts came from. All the ideas of spirits and gods were still in play. Those go back before nation states developed, back when we were small tribes, slowly migrating around the globe. We have some theories about how hyper agency detection led to those superstitions and we excuse our ancestors for it because it was how they survived. We wouldn’t be here now if someone didn’t sacrifice a goat then. You could speculate that we could have taken a different path, but you are really heading toward science fiction with theories like that.

When you get far enough back you can’t describe even the building of sophisticated structures and cultures. Everywhere you look in ancient ruins, there are cultures and belief systems that are tightly woven with how they governed themselves. It seems unlikely that we would have learned to cooperate as we do without that. To simply declare we now understand all those parts and can just break them apart write up a nice neat system of how to keep all of them order, seems like hubris.