What D&D Character are you? – Lawful Good Human Cleric Level 5

I found this link on Michelle Malkin’s post about the death of Dungeon and Dragons co-founder Gary Gygax.

Here is the link to the quiz.

Here are my results:

I Am A: Lawful Good Human Cleric (5th Level)

Ability Scores:

Strength-10

Dexterity-10

Constitution-14

Intelligence-13

Wisdom-15

Charisma-12

Alignment:
Lawful Good A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. He combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. He tells the truth, keeps his word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion. However, lawful good can be a dangerous alignment because it restricts freedom and criminalizes self-interest.

Race:
Humans are the most adaptable of the common races. Short generations and a penchant for migration and conquest have made them physically diverse as well. Humans are often unorthodox in their dress, sporting unusual hairstyles, fanciful clothes, tattoos, and the like.

Class:
Clerics act as intermediaries between the earthly and the divine (or infernal) worlds. A good cleric helps those in need, while an evil cleric seeks to spread his patron’s vision of evil across the world. All clerics can heal wounds and bring people back from the brink of death, and powerful clerics can even raise the dead. Likewise, all clerics have authority over undead creatures, and they can turn away or even destroy these creatures. Clerics are trained in the use of simple weapons, and can use all forms of armor and shields without penalty, since armor does not interfere with the casting of divine spells. In addition to his normal complement of spells, every cleric chooses to focus on two of his deity’s domains. These domains grants the cleric special powers, and give him access to spells that he might otherwise never learn. A cleric’s Wisdom score should be high, since this determines the maximum spell level that he can cast.

Find out What Kind of Dungeons and Dragons Character Would You Be?, courtesy of Easydamus (e-mail)

Weather Channel Founder: Sue Al Gore to expose Global Warming @ Newsbusters

Another interesting blog entry at Newsbusters, Weather Channel Founder: Sue Al Gore to expose Global Warming.

Mr John Coleman was the founder of the Weather Channel. He was at the conference I mentioned in my previous post, here is excerpt from Newsbusters:

On Monday, while speaking at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change being held in New York City, Coleman took his criticisms further by advocating that all those involved in the sale and marketing of carbon credits, including Al Gore, should be sued “to finally put some light on the fraud of global warming.”

Here is something interesting about the conference and why I think the debate should be on, but it does not seem to happen at all:

How delicious. Of course, for those that are interested, Nobel Laureate Gore was invited to speak at this conference — was even offered his normal fee to attend! — but refused. As reported Monday by Anthony Watts, one of the conference speakers (emphasis added):

I was surprised to learn that Al Gore had been offered an opportunity to address this conference, and his usual $200,000 speaking fee and expenses were met, but that he declined.

I also know that invitations went out to NASA GISS principal scientists Dr. James Hansen, and Dr. Gavin Schmidt weeks ago as evidenced by their writeup of the issue on their blog, RealClimate.org a week or so ago.

They have declined the formal invitation sent, even though it would be easy for them to attend, given that NASA GISS is located just a few blocks away at Columbia University.

Since recent polls indicate that about 50% of Americans remain unconvinced that global warming is a serious issue, it would seem this would be a perfect place for Mr. Gore, Dr. James Hansen, and Dr. Gavin Schmidt to bridge the crevasse.

Exactly, Anthony. Sadly, these folks don’t want to speak to the half of the nation not buying into their junk science, for it is so easily exposed as such, and that would bring an end to the fraud.

Although another topic, I sometimes wish Mr Coleman was still running the Weather Channel. I was glad that Mr Coleman does point the finger at the Weather Channel as a culprit in this global warming fraud:

Regardless, Coleman on Monday also pointed his finger at The Weather Channel:

“The Weather Channel had great promise, and that’s all gone now because they’ve made every mistake in the book on what they’ve done and how they’ve done it and it’s very sad,” Coleman said. “It’s now for sale and there’s a new owner of The Weather Channel will be announced – several billion dollars having changed hands in the near future. Let’s hope the new owners can recapture the vision and stop reporting the traffic, telling us what to think and start giving us useful weather information.”

Another thing I found interested in this post was a comment by PopularTech on this blog. The individual provides an excellent resource information about this topic.

This is the best news I have heard yet! He will have a clear judicial precedence and an overwhelming number of scientists and scientific research to draw from to make his case.
UK Court finds 9 Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth (The New Party, UK)
- Al Gore’s ‘nine Inconvenient Untruths’ (The Daily Telegraph, UK)
- Al Gore told there are nine inconvenient truths in his film (The Times, UK)
- An Inconvenient Lie (WorldNetDaily)
- Gore caught lying (WorldNetDaily)
- Gore’s Nine Lies (FrontPage Magazine)
- Judge attacks nine errors in Al Gore’s ‘alarmist’ climate change film (Daily Mail, UK)
Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias (Daily Mail, UK)
- British Schools Ordered to Offer ‘Balance’ When Showing Al Gore’s Global Warming Film (FOXNews)
Maybe this will keep our children from becoming indoctrinated off a propaganda movie.
So how did An Inconvenient Truth become required classroom viewing? (National Post, Canada)

35 Inconvenient Truths (Science and Public Policy Institute)
25 Inconvenient Truths for Al Gore (The National Review Online)
23 Scientific Errors (Science and Public Policy Institute)
20 More inaccuracies (PDF) (UKPRwire)
16 Errors in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth (Science and Public Policy Institute)
6 Inconvenient Truths Indeed (Robert C. Balling, Ph.D. Geography)
The Anti ‘Man-Made’ Global Warming Resource

Global Warming: Is It Really a Crisis? – John R Lott Jr @ FoxNews

An interesting item at FoxNews about Global Warming: Is It Really a Crisis by John R Lott Jr.

In follow up to my post about a recent Grapevine segment, Mr Lott discuss whether global warming is really a crisis.  It makes note of the climate conference have been held in New York on Monday and Tuesday of this week.  The conference was to bring about 100 scientists together to warn against this global warming crisis.  Mr Lott mentions some questions that need to be answered “Yes” to verify if this all make sense to take action:

1) Are global temperatures rising? Surely, they were rising from the late 1970s to 1998, but “there has been no net global warming since 1998.” Indeed, the more recent numbers show that there is now evidence of significant cooling.

2) But supposing that the answer to the first question is “yes,” is mankind responsible for a significant and noticeable portion of an increase in temperatures? Mankind is responsible for just a fraction of one percent of the effect from greenhouse gases, and greenhouse gases are not responsible for most of what causes warming (e.g., the Sun).

Over 100 leading climate scientists from around the world signed a letter in December stating: “significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming.”

In December a list was also released of another 400 scientists who questioned the general notion of significant manmade global warming.

3) If the answer to both preceding questions is “yes,” is an increase temperature changes “bad”? That answer is hardly obvious.

Even the UN’s original draft stated that an increase in temperature of up to two degrees Celsius would be good for many regions of the globe. Higher temperatures could increase ocean levels by between seven inches and two feet over the next 100 years.

Although some blame global warming for seemingly everything, according to others higher temperatures will increase the amount of land that we can use to grow food, it will improve people’s health, and increase biological diversity.

4) Finally, let’s assume that the answer to all three previous questions is “yes.” Does that mean we need more regulations and taxes? No, that is still not clear.

Here is an interesting piece of information about the price of gasoline in this article.  This is something you do not see in the debate of high gasoline prices:

What is often ignored in the debate over global warming is that we already have very substantial taxes on gasoline, averaging 46 cents per gallon in the US. Even if one believes that gasoline use should be restricted to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the question is whether our taxes are already restricting use “too much” or “not enough.” But simply saying that carbon dioxide emissions are bad isn’t enough.

In his conclusion, one would agree that a good debate is needed in regards to the climate change questions.  This does not mean that what Algore and his minions say they are right, but prove that they are right by debating those who disagree and have support facts to support their argument.

However good the intentions, the debate over global warming is much more complicated than simply saying that the world is getting warmer. It is too bad that these questions won’t be getting a real debate this election. The irony is that those who sell themselves as being so caring aren’t careful enough to investigate the impact of their regulations.