Besides needing help from the world, Filippinos can depend upon help from their own far flung kin, it’s their culture…

November 10, 2013

As many as 1,000 dead, maybe 10,000 or more, in maybe the strongest storm in history, a typhoon that swept over parts of the Philippines on Friday and Saturday. That’s hard to comprehend. So many people so quickly in one storm. Man can control a lot of things. But the weather remains defiant.

The typhoon is named Haiyan.


To help those in need:


The U.S. government is committing money for disaster relief for the Philippines, but I imagine a large amount of the help will come from Filipinos who live in America, as well as elsewhere outside the native land. They have organizations collecting money right now I read, and I know that the culture of the Philippines (as well as in other parts of the world) is for those who go abroad to send money back home even in normal times. Families depend upon the help of their far flung relatives. I’ve been told by Filipinos here in the U.S. that back in their home there are few government social programs. A person depends upon family and has an obligation to family. We could use more of that here.

That death toll is staggering and it built so fast. Even as I was reading the first report that said at least 100 dead, another report put the toll at least 1,000 and now it is said to be maybe as high as 10,000 and that it might climb from there.

For those of us who live in areas with relatively mild weather most or all the year, such as where I live, we have to feel grateful and marvel at the fortitude of those who live in such places where devastation by typhoon (and ferry sinkings) seems to be common — although this typhoon with its size is or was not so common.

Could this be another sign of climate change? That is the size of the storm.

The end of the world for some a day or so late; Is this climate change or same old same old?

May 23, 2011

If you predict just about anything you have a good chance of being right — it may well come to pass. Just don’t be too specific about time and date.That poor preacher who predicted that the world would end Saturday was apparently wrong and as I understand it is now in seclusion and quite distraught. Reportedly some sucker in New York spent his life savings buying posters and such proclaiming the end of the world.

But then again they may have been just a day early. For it was the end of the world for at least 116 (the latest count as I write this) folks in Joplin, Mo., where a tornado struck Sunday, and it may well seem like the end of the world for as many or more who are picking through the rubble looking for what little they can salvage or worse yet looking for missing loved ones and friends.

Within the last hour or so I heard a purported weather expert say that he has never seen such a cold weather pattern in the mid level atmosphere and thinks it might be unprecedented, but he was quick to also note that there have been cyclical weather patterns of  heavy snow packs and torrential rains and floods followed by droughts and then deluges all over again since weather began to be officially recorded. And what happened before that we don’t necessarily know for sure — at least we don’t have the official statistics (the Bible of course speaks of flood and famines).

He also indicated one cannot attribute the recent spate of bad weather and natural disasters all over the nation and world to the notion of global warming or climate change, as it has been renamed (because we hear of both extreme hot and cold weather). Those who study such things just don’t know for sure what is going on, or at least he did not, he indicated.

(I’m just paraphrasing what I heard on part of Tom Sullivan’s talk show aired on Fox Radio. I got it by way of KFBK, Sacramento, where Sullivan used to hold forth until he hit the big time and moved to New York.)

I wished I knew of some independent and objective and non-biased repository of scientific observations and conclusions on the weather so I could get this whole climate change thing in perspective. I know that the reactionary right is in denial and/or thinks it’s all a ploy by the far left to use as an excuse to control all human behavior (the right mainly focuses on control of sexual behavior). I have also just read in the past day that some of the more thoughtful among the so-called “conservative” movement or Republican Party, that is the thinking branch, would like to give some credence to the possible dangers of climate change and the notion that man has had some part in causing it and possibly has the power to help remedy it. But they risk being kicked out of their own movement for such heresy. Just ask Newt Gingrich who has had to explain away past spoken sympathies with the notion of climate change brought on at least partly by man’s activities and possibly fixable by man’s change of behaviors. He’s not even allowed to say it is worth looking into (his explanation of past statements — not necessarily so, just worth looking into). The mighty Rush Limburger Cheese himself has said Gingrich’s nod to the notions of the non-reactionaries on possible climate change was in inexplicable (read that unacceptable).

Mixing science and politics could lead to the end of the world for us all.


I kind of indirectly described Gingrich as thoughtful. I think he is an idea person, although the word “thoughtful’ might not apply to him depending upon the context of that word one has in mind. He is given to making rash and bombastic statements. But his current problem seems to come from thinking, that is at looking at more than one side of an issue, something his brethren do not approve of. To be fair, same goes on the far left.