Conscious Choice cover

From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

 
Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.

 

“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.

 

Available everywhere for $3.99 (before discount) at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all ebook vendors, or direct from the ebook publisher, ebookit. And if you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner.


Met Office admits global warming has slowed down over the past 10 years

Progress! The Met Office of the UK admitted in a report today that global warming has slowed down over the past 10 years.

Link fixed. Sorry!

Readers!
 

I must unfortunately ask you for your financial support because I do not depend on ads and rely entirely on the generosity of readers to keep Behind the Black running. You can either make a one time donation for whatever amount you wish, or you sign up for a monthly subscription ranging from $2 to $15 through Paypal or $3 to $50 through Patreon.


Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.


Your support is even more essential to me because I not only keep this site free from advertisements, I do not use the corrupt social media companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to promote my work. I depend wholly on the direct support of my readers.


You can provide that support to Behind The Black with a contribution via Patreon or PayPal. To use Patreon, go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation. For PayPal click one of the following buttons:
 


 

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


 

If Patreon or Paypal don't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 

Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
 

Or you can donate by using Zelle through your bank. You will need to give my name and email address (found at the bottom of the "About" page). The best part of this electronic option is that no fees will be deducted! What you donate will be what I receive.

7 comments

  • Dan Pangburn

    Completely stopped would be more accurate.

    The factors that resulted in the 20th century global temperature run-up have been discovered. The contribution of atmospheric carbon dioxide is between small and insignificant. The time-integral of sunspot numbers and effective sea surface temperature are the main contributors.

    A simple equation, with inputs of accepted measurements from government agencies, calculates the average global temperatures since 1895 with 88% accuracy (87.6% if CO2 is assumed to have no influence). See the equation, an eye-opening graph of the results and how they are derived in the pdfs at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true (see especially the pdfs made public on 4/10/10 and 6/27/10).

    The future average global temperature trend that this equation calculates is down.

  • taka

    [your daily mail link is broken – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1333225/Global-warming-slowing-say-scientists.html%5D

    What they actually said was the rate at which temperatures were rising has slowed down, not that it has stopped or reversed. It’s still going up.

    Dan, your link states that the agt has declined between 2001 and 2009, when in fact the opposite is true.

    [from daily mail article] “However researchers from the Met Office say there is still a warming trend over the 10 years since 2000 and the decade was the hottest on record.”

    Having spent a year (2009) living in the Arctic, i can tell you first hand that global warming is a alive and well there. E.g. mosquitos 700 miles north of the Arctic circle during summer months.

    Regardless of causes, we should be doing what we can to reduce and eventually eliminate pollution, instead of socializing it onto society and the environment. Pollution is a socialized cost of production of all products. One would think that self-described capitalists who apparently despise socialism would be abhorrent to this form of socialism too… but unfortunately they are not abhorrent to hypocrisy.

    My two cents.

  • taka, who cares? I’ve yet to hear anyone make an argument to justify why we should do anything to stem global warming. No-one has made an accurate scientific prediction of this “doomsday” that we’re continuingly being told is right around the corner. Many areas of the Earth are essentially uninhabitable during winter months.. for all we know the on-balance effect of global warming could be for the better.

    It seems a lot of people think change == bad, and can’t conceive of the possibility that change can be good.

  • Dan Pangburn

    Taka,
    I monitor all five reporting agencies and they agree fairly well as graphed on page 9 of the pdf made public 4/10/10 at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true. As can be seen the average global temperature trend from 2001 through 2009 is down.
    The agt anomalies (no offsets) averaged for each year for the five agencies are as follows.
    YEAR AVG
    1998 0.55
    1999 0.23
    2000 0.22
    2001 0.37
    2002 0.45
    2003 0.44
    2004 0.38
    2005 0.48
    2006 0.41
    2007 0.42
    2008 0.28
    2009 0.42

    The data can be verified using the following links to the five agencies:

    NOAA
    ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/anomalies/monthly.land_ocean.90S.90N.df_1901-2000mean.dat

    Hadley
    http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt

    GISS
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

    RSS
    http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/temp-and-precip/upper-air/rss_monthly_msu_amsu_channel_tlt_anomalies_land_and_ocean.txt

    UAH
    http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt

  • taka

    Trent, if you’re perfectly happy with pollution, maybe you should live down wind of a large manufacturing plant or coal power plant; even natural gas distribution generators (not positive what they’re called, but they pump natual gas through the pipes running around the country) are unhealthy to live near.

    Pollution is a socialized cost of production. Why not make producers bear that cost? It will likely increase product costs (unless they find cleaner methods of production), but health care costs should also lower (for private or government provided health care).

    What ‘accurate scientific prediction’ are you looking for. Temperatures are rising, as the Daily Mail points out. Particulate pollution actually masks global warming. (Which if you’re a geo-engineering buff, might be a good thing. Personally, there are too many unknowns with deliberately injecting pollutants into the environment)

    I’m well aware that parts of the Earth are uninhabitable during winter months (I lived for 12 months in northern Greenland… everything was shipped/flown in)

    As for change, it can be good and bad. Good if you live in rich northern latitude countries that have exported production and associated costs, bad if you live in a low lying coastal region. Those people are the people that “care”.

    We will likely have to live with climate change; question is, do we make it more difficult later by doing nothing now? Populations will be forced to move, increasing pressures on existing resources (land/water), which will lead to conflict.

    So yeah, I care too. It impacts our economy (especially if we ignore the growing demand for cleaner technologies), our security and our health.

  • Dan Pangburn

    Zim,
    So, you censor links to facts from me but print Taka’s erroneous and misguided opinions. I’m out of here.

  • Dan Pangburn

    Note to all: My post was, probably because of all those links, caught by a spam trap. My hat is off to Zim. He overrode the trap and added the post. It is the 28 Nov. post which appears above.

Readers: the rules for commenting!

 

No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.

 

However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.

 

Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *