Sunday, November 17, 2013

In Washington D.C. for a movie showing, John McCain talks about global shaking

By: Sutirtha Bagchi
Published: August 23, 2012
Washington D.C.: John McCain may have lost his last chance to occupy the White House with his defeat to Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential elections, having lost the Electoral College narrowly while having won the popular vote to his Democratic rival. However that did not stop him from making a recent stop at the White House recently for a private showing of his recently-made movie “An Awkward, Problematic and Irksome Extension of the Logically Possible” to President Barack Obama, his most recent wife, Madeline Obama and their two children. (Barack had a nasty divorce with Michelle Obama shortly after the elections of 2008 when he refused to make her the Secretary of State citing national security concerns. His subsequent marriage with Madeline has however proved very stable as Madeline has been content to simply being a trophy wife for Barack and attending the numerous state dinners in the Capitol.)

Explaining the theme of the movie, John McCain explained, “Global shaking has come to become the foremost problem impacting human civilization. It is now an established fact that the trampling of the earth by 7.1 billion people and innumerable more animals is shaking the very foundations of the earth and if not addressed immediately, will prove to be a threat to our children and grand children.” When asked about how he got interested in the topic, the former senator explained that this topic had always fascinated him since his days in the military when he would feel guilty of flying an A-4 Skyhawk because of the feeling that he was contributing “more than his fair share” to the earth’s vibration and disturbing her natural cycles and patterns. However he finally got the time to work on this topic that had been so near and dear to his heart, after having lost the 2008 elections to his Democratic rival and his Senate seat in Arizona. The former senator mentioned that his recent work on global shaking had taken him around the globe and had gained wide acceptance in scientific circles all across the world. He is convinced that that there is broad consensus for a pact to address global shaking, with the only hold-outs to such a global regime being India, Eritrea and Burkina Faso, all of whom have cited concerns regarding free practice of their native dance forms as stumbling blocks before they can accept any such treaty.

Critics of the senator have criticized that his attempts to bring up this topic of global shaking are little more than a thinly veiled attempt to prevent African Americans from engaging in their hip hop dance styles, an allegation that the former senator refuses to deny. Other prominent critics from the left such as Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal have argued that the reactionary forces on the right are spreading the canard of global shaking in an attempt to limit the size of assembly in any corner of the world at any given point of time to less than 1,000 persons, a charge which the senator thoroughly denies. Finally in his response to others who have suggested that the senator has chosen to engage in the issue at this late stage in his career to bag the Noble Prize in Physics before he hits the bucket, a charge the senator thoroughly denies, the senator remarked “After having won the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, (popularly known as the Noble Prize in Economics) in 2009, I have no desire of going to Stockholm yet again at this ripe age. All that I desire that when I am laid to rest, the earth below me should not be shaking.”

Labels: , , , , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger kd said...

Just some hard facts about atmospheric CO2:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Global_Carbon_Emission_by_Type_to_Y2004.png

Now it is conceivable to say that so far we haven't seen any drastic changes in spite of such an abnormal increase of CO2. But is it not rational to be struck by the 'non-normality' of the situation and try to deduce possible outcomes given current trend, based on the best guesses that we might make (which might be quite inaccurate)?

When the 'best guess' estimates say that with some probability (for argument's sake say 10% chance) that this might precipitate a global crisis in the foreseeable future unless checked, what should be done? Wait and watch till the probability gets to 90% and then act?

Honestly I do not know how far the global warming alarm is true, and how soon effects might be seen, but it is certain that we are upsetting the balance of nature present for hundreds of thousands of years (as shown in the plots). If someone is trying to analyze it rationally, i'd sure listen to them to understand better.. whether I act on it or not is personal privilege (unless forced to by mandatory rules, which in a democracy roughly means a majority support). But trying to discount rational analysis as a figment of imagination is juvenile at best!

July 27, 2008 at 8:19 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home