Save WSU's Trees!

We might be getting lucky here. This could get entertaining.
And, the moonbats are letting us in on their plans.

A friend of mine from church works in the capital planning office and she tells me that the primary reason for removing these trees is to improve wheelchair access. What we have here are competing polically correct objectives. My own heart is with people in wheelchairs.

I Think That I Shall Never See A Petition Lovely As A Tree

With regards to the planned "deforestation" in front of Avery Hall on the WSU campus, I could really care less. WSU is not the center of our universe and there is a lot more that goes on in this community than the undergraduate penchant for revolutionary drama encouraged by their mentors in the ivy-covered halls of academe.

On the one hand, those are trees that were planted by the university, not some old-growth cedar grove, and the university can do with them as they please. On the other hand, there is a certain delicious hoist and petard element to this whole situation. As long as the professors professional activists are busy biting the hand that feeds them and are not agitating and meddling in the city of Pullman's business, I'm happy.

But the online petition started to save the trees has provided for some rather amusing comments:

46. Don't Destroy Our Campus!!!!
I love the big old trees on campus. The forest-y look is what attracted me to WSU in the first place. The trees make campus beautiful and wonderful to walk around. HOW DARE YOU DESTROY A TREE!!! Trees are irriplaceable. They make our air cleaner and our environment gorgeous. This is disgusting! I cannot believe I am associated with a university that would do such a horrible, phallic act!!!
7/17/2008 9:09:47 AM

"irriplaceable?" Yikes. A mind is also a terrible thing to waste. With spelling errors like that, it seems the English Department's biggest problem is not trees being cut down. "Phallic act?" Must be a Women's Studies major.

527. When There's Nothing Left To Sustain, Why Talk About Sustainability?
A military officer boasts of destroying a village in order to save it; a bomb is labeled a "peacemaker;" and institutional racism is labeled "diversity." So we shouldn't be surprised to see the cutting down of trees labeled "beautification." But it doesn't change the truth. Save the trees and cut down the lies.
John Streamas, Comparative Ethnic Studies
7/14/2008 3:56:01 PM

Ah, yes. War, racism, cutting down trees...It's all the same to ExStreamas. What a maroon.

579. Save the Avery Grove Trees and the Murrow Yard Trees too
This is ridiculous. Cutting down a tree here and there that is diseased or otherwise problematic is one thing, but this sort of clear cutting is absurd and, I would add, anti-environmental.
Christopher Lupke, Associate Professor, Foreign Languages and Cultures
7/13/2008 9:40:16 PM

I'm suprised Lu Laoshi didn't implicate the "Forbes Gang" for the "clear cutting."

585. Cougar pride?
Where is the pride in our heritage when we propose to cut down so many trees that in addition to their important shading function and great beauty are a rich part of WSU's history? And where is the imagination of our planners that they cannot find a way to keep the trees while making useful improvements?
T.V. Reed, Professor of English, Avery Hall
7/13/2008 3:24:07 PM

And where is the UFCW and their big-shot Seattle lawyers?

Prayer of the Day

Mile Kepka/San Francisco Chronicle, AP Photos

Michael Hanly figured crews were only trimming the trees when he saw them carrying tools to the old spruce and pine outside his office at Washington State University's Avery Hall last week.

But they kept cutting, and the trees eventually were gone.

Hanly did some digging and learned that more trees are on the chopping block around Avery, Bryan and Murrow halls during the third phase of the Library Road project, slated for completion in Sept. 2009.

"If they had said from the beginning that these trees were going to come down with this project, you can bet there would have been a protest," said Hanly, an English professor.

Hanly claims the university did not adequately make its plans known to the public, and he is trying to generate support from others concerned about the trees' removal. He's gathered some English department staff to protest and hopes to involve other departments if a compromise can't be reached with WSU's Capital Planning and Development Office.

- "Tree removal surprises some faculty and staff; 80 trees being cut down as part of university's Library Road project," Moscow-Pullman Daily News, July 11, 2008

Oh Lord, if a bunch of middle-aged WSU English professors are going to protest trees being cut down on the WSU campus, please do not let it be a nude "sit-in" as we have seen down in Berkeley. Amen.



UPDATE: Perhaps former Whitman County Democratic State Committeeman Dave Gibney would care to apologize to Christians for commenting that the Rapture would get rid of all the "stuck up assholes." Perhaps Democratic House candidate Tyanna Kelley would like to apologize to 9th District farmers for attacking their "gaz-guzzling" trucks.

Grow up.

"Change comes through education, not tax"

Brilliant Town Crier column in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News from our very own Scotty Anderson. Very classy, Scotty, mentioning Don Pelton. I'd love to see some kind of memorial to him on Bishop Blvd. He did as much as anybody to see the growth there happen.

Stay tuned for my response to Mr. Civil Discourse's ludicrous attempt at recreating East Berlin on the Palouse.

Though I am thankful the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the right to keep and bear arms, I am disappointed that it even had to go to the Supreme Court.

There have been many laws that have assaulted the right to keep and bear arms. Many of the laws are advocated by people exercising their First Amendment rights to trample on Second Amendment rights, when it is because of the Second Amendment rights we have been able to secure the First Amendment rights.

When someone thinks back to the time when America was getting organized and people were fighting and dying to make this country work, you can't help but realize some of the issues we face today pale in comparison.

One such issue is a Seattle-like mandatory 20-cent tax added to each and every plastic bag someone uses when shopping at a Pullman-area store. To think that people have enough time on their hands to petition the government to tax its citizens even more is embarrassing when compared to the founding of a nation.

On the other hand, there is a group of individuals who wear a pager day and night ready to drop what they're doing to help someone in need. Sometimes at 3 a.m. these volunteer firefighters are needed to clean up somebody else's tragedy.

Several times a year I see people standing outside of local grocery stores volunteering their time to collect food for the food bank. Others volunteer hundreds of man-hours to put together the Fourth of July celebration at Sunnyside Park.

In their own way all these people are giving up something of their own in order to make our community a better place. In all cases what they give up is time. In some cases these volunteers also give up their own money to help pay for materials or gas to get around. They give up a good night's sleep, and when asked to do it again, they do.

In their own way each of the volunteers is helping to make our community safer, more comfortable, and more fun. Our community is a better place because of these people.

Those petitioning the Pullman City Council to make grocers charge 20 cents per plastic bag used at the store probably think they're helping to make our community a better place.

A recent article in the Daily News mentioned someone seeing 22 plastic bags on College Hill, but there was no mention of an effort to clean them up.

It was suggested that residents start to carry reusable bags and use those instead of plastic bags. No one, however, has volunteered to hand out these shopping bags.

It is argued that we shouldn't view the proposal as elitist, instead we are showing respect and care for our community. But no one is standing in front of the stores to educate people.

It is suggested that we can use the new tax to donate the money to the local food bank or help pay for community improvements.

I would like to see this group of people go to the community and try to change their habits through education. Educating people is better than forcing the government to tax its citizens.

Some people see a need and they volunteer their time, their sleep, and their money to the cause. Others see a need and they want to use the strong arm of government regulation to further the cause.

Why stop at charging for plastic bags? Maybe there should be a tax on glass bottles, aluminum cans, and even "keg" cups. That tax could be used to clean up the broken glass, empty aluminum cans, and keg cups that litter some of the streets in Pullman. This may seem far-fetched, but I would wager targeting plastic bottles is the next item on the list.

Is this group of citizens using Seattle as inspiration? If so, the city of Seattle is no longer buying plastic water bottles. How long until that is proposed in Pullman?

Final thoughts: Don Pelton - the Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development is done holding Pullman hostage and Wal-Mart's coming. I wish you were here to see it.

T-85 goes the countdown.

Slimes Euphemism of the Day

The Seattle Slimes still can't bring itself to call the treehugging wackos that firebombed a UW horticulture clinic in 2001 "terrorists." The latest euphemism: "ecosaboteurs."

A federal jury found that Briana Waters, a former Olympia resident, was among a group of ecosaboteurs who torched the center in the predawn hours of May 21, 2001, causing about $1.5 million in damage. The center was later rebuilt at a cost of about $7 million

I guess the Slimes just doesn't consider a perky little suburban violin teacher named "Briana" with a 3 year old daughter a "terrorist."

"In 2008, a 100 Percent Chance of Alarm"

A group of left-wing environmentalist wackos are attempting to get the ribbon seal put on the list of endangered species. The ribbon seal's primary habitat is drift ice in the Bering Sea, which according to the tree huggers, is being destroyed by "global warming." If the ribbon seal is listed as an endangered species, it could lead to economically crippling regulations on emissions in the U.S.. That, of course, is the point, not the protection of seals.

We've all seen and read the much ballyhooed coverage of the shrinking Arctic ice pack. But did you know that since 1979 (when satellite photos became available), the Antarctic ice cap has been steadily growing and the mean temperature steadily declining, with last year seeing the most Antarctic sea ice yet? I didn't think so. Western-style capitalism, in all its evil forms, must be eradicated. Global warming BS is succeeding where thousands of Soviet nuclear warheads failed. Al Gore's Travelin' Global Warming Show is rolling along, and nothing as inconsequential as the facts can be allowed to get in the way.

Or can they? James Tierney, the Science Editor of the New York Times, wrote in a column published on New Year's Day that he's had it with global warming hucksterism:

I’d like to wish you a happy New Year, but I’m afraid I have a different sort of prediction.

You’re in for very bad weather. In 2008, your television will bring you image after frightening image of natural havoc linked to global warming. You will be told that such bizarre weather must be a sign of dangerous climate change — and that these images are a mere preview of what’s in store unless we act quickly to cool the planet.

Unfortunately, I can’t be more specific. I don’t know if disaster will come by flood or drought, hurricane or blizzard, fire or ice. Nor do I have any idea how much the planet will warm this year or what that means for your local forecast. Long-term climate models cannot explain short-term weather.

But there’s bound to be some weird weather somewhere, and we will react like the sailors in the Book of Jonah. When a storm hit their ship, they didn’t ascribe it to a seasonal weather pattern. They quickly identified the cause (Jonah’s sinfulness) and agreed to an appropriate policy response (throw Jonah overboard).

Today’s interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.

A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the hottest year on record. At year’s end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record — it was actually lower than any year since 2001 — the BBC confidently proclaimed, “2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.”

When the Arctic sea ice last year hit the lowest level ever recorded by satellites, it was big news and heralded as a sign that the whole planet was warming. When the Antarctic sea ice last year reached the highest level ever recorded by satellites, it was pretty much ignored. A large part of Antarctica has been cooling recently, but most coverage of that continent has focused on one small part that has warmed.

When Hurricane Katrina flooded New Orleans in 2005, it was supposed to be a harbinger of the stormier world predicted by some climate modelers. When the next two hurricane seasons were fairly calm — by some measures, last season in the Northern Hemisphere was the calmest in three decades — the availability entrepreneurs changed the subject. Droughts in California and Australia became the new harbingers of climate change (never mind that a warmer planet is projected to have more, not less, precipitation over all).

The most charitable excuse for this bias in weather divination is that the entrepreneurs are trying to offset another bias. The planet has indeed gotten warmer, and it is projected to keep warming because of greenhouse emissions, but this process is too slow to make much impact on the public.

When judging risks, we often go wrong by using what’s called the availability heuristic: we gauge a danger according to how many examples of it are readily available in our minds. Thus we overestimate the odds of dying in a terrorist attack or a plane crash because we’ve seen such dramatic deaths so often on television; we underestimate the risks of dying from a stroke because we don’t have so many vivid images readily available.

Slow warming doesn’t make for memorable images on television or in people’s minds, so activists, journalists and scientists have looked to hurricanes, wild fires and starving polar bears instead. They have used these images to start an “availability cascade,” a term coined by Timur Kuran, professor of economics and political science at Duke University, and Cass R. Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago.

The availability cascade is a self-perpetuating process: the more attention a danger gets, the more worried people become, leading to more news coverage and more fear. Once the images of Sept. 11 made terrorism seem a major threat, the press and the police lavished attention on potential new attacks and supposed plots. After Three Mile Island and “The China Syndrome,” minor malfunctions at nuclear power plants suddenly became newsworthy.

“Many people concerned about climate change,” Dr. Sunstein says, “want to create an availability cascade by fixing an incident in people’s minds. Hurricane Katrina is just an early example; there will be others. I don’t doubt that climate change is real and that it presents a serious threat, but there’s a danger that any ‘consensus’ on particular events or specific findings is, in part, a cascade.”

Once a cascade is under way, it becomes tough to sort out risks because experts become reluctant to dispute the popular wisdom, and are ignored if they do. Now that the melting Arctic has become the symbol of global warming, there’s not much interest in hearing other explanations of why the ice is melting — or why the globe’s other pole isn’t melting, too.

Global warming has an impact on both polar regions, but they’re also strongly influenced by regional weather patterns and ocean currents. Two studies by NASA and university scientists last year concluded that much of the recent melting of Arctic sea ice was related to a cyclical change in ocean currents and winds, but those studies got relatively little attention — and were certainly no match for the images of struggling polar bears so popular with availability entrepreneurs.

Roger A. Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, recently noted the very different reception received last year by two conflicting papers on the link between hurricanes and global warming. He counted 79 news articles about a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, and only 3 news articles about one in a far more prestigious journal, Nature.

Guess which paper jibed with the theory — and image of Katrina — presented by Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth”?

It was, of course, the paper in the more obscure journal, which suggested that global warming is creating more hurricanes. The paper in Nature concluded that global warming has a minimal effect on hurricanes. It was published in December — by coincidence, the same week that Mr. Gore received his Nobel Peace Prize.

In his acceptance speech, Mr. Gore didn’t dwell on the complexities of the hurricane debate. Nor, in his roundup of the 2007 weather, did he mention how calm the hurricane season had been. Instead, he alluded somewhat mysteriously to “stronger storms in the Atlantic and Pacific,” and focused on other kinds of disasters, like “massive droughts” and “massive flooding.”

“In the last few months,” Mr. Gore said, “it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter.” But he was being too modest. Thanks to availability entrepreneurs like him, misinterpreting the weather is getting easier and easier.