the C word

i'm talking about controversy of course. been through the most interesting homework of my life (that i remember). --> i realize i don't remember a lot of things. was trying to figure out the triangle, 90degrees, with 45degree incline, 2m height.. what would be the hypotenuse. HAHAHAH sine cosine or tangent?
i gave up. that was digressing.

anyway church's message for the youths on sunday was- Signs of the End of the Age.
hmm.
i kept harping on the fact that the *predicted* date for the end of the world is 21 Dec 2012.
WHICH MEANS I WILL NEVER BE 20 YEARS OLD.
nuuuuuuuuuuuuuu):

but that's hosewagon. rubbish. spoutsapose. the mayan calendar just restarts itself.
see this is a controversial issue between the church/religious bodies and scientists/people obsessed with calculating the time of the end of the earth.
uhm yeah so.........?
whatcha gonna do? conjure superman to drag the asteroid back to outer space?
speaking of which, it's very interesting how we have astronomers looking out for these kind of things, but we have seen none so far.
as i love these trivia, absorb them so much faster than what $%$@#$%^ cities and it's polarization, peripheries and cores, yadayada.

***************

then i was doing my research for my essay paper. *ahem, homework given in SEPTEMBER, due this friday, started last friday 1%* on the controversies of climate change.
which happen to be VERY interesting,
so much so that i actually kinda enjoy my research. and got carried away with this documentary i was watching, i practically transcripted it :/
until i found a transcript online ^^

warning: ramble

it's talking about how climate change is, though happening, it's not like how most people out there believe it.
apparently 97/100 scientists believe that climate change is a (sole) result of human activity, (please don't cite me or believe me, i read this of wiki and I CAN'T REMEMBER much, it was like 10 hours ago), while only 40++% of the population think so. another 40++% thinks it's human activity AND natural process.

-- the documentary states that scientists and organisations are pushing for the climate change issue to be in the forefront because it's a political ideology. being against the issue will be political suicide (my words).
-- creating a problem will mean funding for the scientists.
-- and this issue on global warming, is also an economic activity in itself. thousands of jobs are based on this.
-- not to mention sidelines such as eco-tourism, green products, green consumerism..
-- but see the thing is, they are out there arguing that carbon dioxide (resulting from human activity), has little relationship to the rising temperatures. in fact, more carbon dioxide led to a DROP in temperature in the 1940s to 1965+.
-- AND also, carbon dioxide is but 0.054% of the atmosphere, and not even a very effective greenhouse gas at that!
i would go on but my bed bids me. CAUSE i bought a newwww quilt!!! *hugs the quilt in eggcitedment.* (heehee exciteDment)

oh no! warm earth! what am i to do??

adding random cute animalz cause i can

MIAAAAAO

ramble over

I APOLOGISE if you read it all, i just adore these issues.
and it's all from memory so i may have gotten some things wrong.
see this all spills out on my blog, but not in my essay.
BECAUSE it's an essay and i have no idea what my points may include, and how i may structure my argument):
goosenight!

/edit. added random photos cause this post looks like a wall of text. hearing the TLDR in the back of my mind. i never really like dmy blog so pictureless.