ASCLEPIADES

Retrieved from "http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Greece_on_fire%2C_death_toll_exceeds_60": August 27, 2007 Fires continue to burn in Greece on Monday destroying everything in their path. Death toll has exceeded 60 with daily Greek newspapers Kathimerini and Ta Nea reporting reporting 61 and 63 deaths respectively. Ancient Olympia, birthplace of the Olympics, was also threatened but firefighters kept the site safe. The new museum of Olympia was saved in the last minute but part of the ancient stadium was not spared. The Greek Government has offered a 1 million Euro reward for anyone providing information which leads to the arrest of an arsonist. A Greek government statement read: "The reward is set between 100,000 and 1m euros for every [act] of arson, depending on whether death or serious injury occurred and the size of the damage." The Greek government is under severe criticism for not doing enough to combat the raging fires. Greek newspaper Ta Nea is reporting that the government is facing collapse accusing it of lacking an organized plan to combat the fires. It adds that there are tens of reports resulting from witnesses that demonstrate the ad hoc movement of fire fighting forces but also tragically, an absence of a plan for evacuating villages resulting in the unnecessarily increased death toll. Emergency workers and fire-fighting planes from other European Union countries have joined the battle against the fires, and more help is expected from countries outside the EU. List of affected areas Updated on August 26, 2007 at 22:00 Arta: Under partial control. Pella: Kleisohori village in flames. Evros: Mikrakio in flames. Ilia: New fires in Prasidaki, Bartholomio, Makistos, Sekoula, Lalas, Leprea, Fanari. Messenia: Fires rage on in Tavgeto, Finikounta, Metaksades, Diavolitsi. Laconia: Fronts in the areas of: Geraki, Kallithea, Platanaki, Palaioxori, Oitilos, Aeropoli. Evia: Aliveri, Mesoxori, Traxili, Kremastos, Mistogeronta, Farana, Partheni, Gaia, Manikia. Zakynthos: Fire in Alikana. Arkadia: Araxomites, Asea, Leontari, Mavriki, Makrisi. Corinth: Improvement in sofiko, fires still burning in Kalentzi, Halki, Soulinari, Agia Triada, Milea. Argolis: Fire burning in the area of Lefkakia. Phthiotis: Perivoli, Asvestis, Dilofo, Zilefto. Thesprotia: Under partial control the fire in Tsamanda. Viotia: Kanalaki, Mazi. Corfu: New fire in the area of porta. Sources Γιάννης Λ. Πολίτης (Yannis L. Politis) "Κατάρρευση (Collapse)". Ta Nea Online, August 27, 2007 "Greek forest fires reward offered". BBC, August 27, 2007 "Μαίνεται η πύρινη κόλαση σε Πελοπόννησο και Εύβοια (Hellfire continues in the Peloponnese and Evia]". Kathimerini, August 27, 2007

Here comes Book XII, v. 945-952: ille, oculis postquam saeui monumenta doloris exuuiasque hausit, furiis accensus et ira terribilis: 'tune hinc spoliis indute meorum eripiare mihi? Pallas te hoc uulnere, Pallas immolat et poenam scelerato ex sanguine sumit.' hoc dicens ferrum aduerso sub pectore condit feruidus; ast illi soluuntur frigore membra uitaque cum gemitu fugit indignata sub umbras. The other, soon as his eyes drank in the trophy, that memorial of cruel grief, fired with fury and terrible in his wrath: "Art thou, thou clad in my beloved one's spoils, to be snatched hence from my hands? 'Tis Pallas, Pallas who with this stroke sacrifices thee, and takes atonement of thy guilty blood!" So saying, full in his breast he buries the sword with fiery zeal. But the other's limbs grew slack and chill, and with a moan life passed indignant to the Shadows below "On the so-called "Abrupt Ending" of the Aeneid" by Takayuki Yamasawa seems a nice essay to me: briefly, he concluded: "Thus, the end of the Aeneid is neither 'violent' nor 'astonishing.' That is only a superficial impression and we might call it misdirected to try to detect Virgil's anti-Roman sentiments in these aspects of the poem." Anyway, several fictional endings had been written for the Aeneid. Here is the notorious case of the "Supplement to the Twelfth Book of the Aeneid" by Maffeo Vegio. I hope this may be useful.

Salve! Here is the last part of the talk transcripte of Newsweek's Senior editor Sharon Begley Live Talk on Wednesday, August 8, at noon, ET, about climate change denial and its lasting pervasiveness Catonsville, MD: The majority of global warming deniers appear to intertwine their political beliefs into their opinions. How can we remove politics from science, in which there truly is no dispute over global warming? SB: People much smarter than I are trying to figure this out. People of faith are becoming active on this issue, arguing that it is incumbent on man to preserve the world God gave us, and that we have a moral obligation not to mess things up too badly for future generations. But as you say, this is all highly, highly political (see some of the blogosphere traffic on my story to get an idea of the invective) and it will be a challenge to find common ground. Maybe Exxon's statement that 'we are not a denier' and that climate change poses a real and serious threat is a step toward that. Tacoma WA: Why are some people changing the wording from "global warming" to "climate change"? It feels deceptive or manipulative. SB: It was a political calculation, the idea being that g.w sounds threatening and c.c. sounds natural. But truth be told, the greenhouse effect will do more than raise median global temps. It is also altering patterns of rainfall and shifting atmospheric circulation, so that's why I use 'climate change'---it's more general and better covers what's in store. Stockton, CA: Some global warming deniers talk about the role of sunspots (ostensibly an 11-year cycle) causing more havoc with storms and weather changes than global warming. Has any research been done on this? SB: Yes, and the solar cycle has been found to cause some climate change on earth, but not enough to account for recent observations. Go to www.realclimate.org/ and search on 'sunspots' for a good explanation. Bonita Springs FL: If we reduce emissons of greenhouse gases now, will it be in time to make the changes we need to slow or stop warming? SB: It will be tough. But since CO2 has an atmospheric lifetime of at least 100 years, every molecule we put up today is there for a long, long time. Atmospheric CO2 is on track to reach 2 times its pre-industrial levels in a few decades; the question is whether we can keep is from rising further, and for that emissions cuts are necessary but perhaps not sufficient (see answer on carbon sequestration above). St Louis, MO: There are always hot and cold cycles, like when the Ice Age came. Isn't a big part of global warming from normal temperature cycles? SB: There is definitely natural variation. But that leaves a fingerprint different from what we are seeing; also, in a natural cycle of warming either you need an outside source of heat (more solar energy reaching us) or warmer regions of earth must be balanced by colder regions, or else you violate the laws of thermodynamics. The current warming, changes in atmospheric circulation etc. cannot be explained by natural variation. See chapter 9 of the 2007 IPCC report, http://www.ipcc.ch/ , from 'working group one.' Winona Lake, IN: Why would I place any confidence in the government to fix global warming when it fails to fix problems at every turn? SB: Who says it has to be all government? Corporations and individuals are taking steps to curb their carbon emissions. On the other hand, government is us; as long as the public doesn't really care or believe that human activities are altering the climate, why should our elected reps do anything? Kendall Park, NJ: How can you definitively state that global warming is occuring when temperatures have only been recorded on a consistent basis for less than 200 years? SB: There are lots of so-called proxy data, from tree rings, ice cores, carbon isotope ratios and other sources that tell what global temps have been like going back thousands of years. This 'paleo' record is getting more and more robust; see chapter 6 of the 2007 IPCC report, http://www.ipcc.ch/ . Marion, OH: I understand that the global temperatures from the 1940s to the 1970s decreased. In the 1970s, Newsweek warned of global cooling at that time. This also was a period of increasing CO2 emissions. Why did the temperature decrease when there was an increase in CO2? Was this not because of CO2 gases? SB: The temperature decrease then was caused by soaring atmospheric concentrations of sulfate aerosols, which cool the climate and were sufficient to counter the rising CO2. Also, there is a lag between CO2 emissions and climate change. Now that sulfates are under control (these air pollutants also cause acid rain and other nasty things), the full force of CO2 is being felt. New Orleans, LA: How does purchasing carbon offsets lower the ambient temperature of the earth? Who gets the money from carbon trading? How is it spent? SB: Carbon offsets are meant to balance out the CO2 you emit when you, say, fly coast to coast. Middlemen use the money to plant trees and take other steps to zero-out that CO2. It's kind of like a medieval indulgence for your sins. Will it do much good? Hard to say. Houston, TX: I'm hearing a lot about alternative energy sources like, wind energy farms, to help meet the world's demand for energy in a "green" way. What impact will these alternative energy sources will have on global warming? SB: If we can light our homes, run factories and power cars/planes without emitting CO2, then those emissions will be less than they would be otherwise. Renewables now make up only 6% of US energy sources, so we have a ways to go. The easiest way to cut CO2 from our use of energy is through energy efficiency---use less to get the same things done, ie without freezing in the dark or drinking warm beer. Physicists say there are easy ways to improve efficiency 70%, and compact fluorescent lightbulbs are only the tip of the iceberg. Atlanta, GA: You mention who is funding the "global warming deniers", but just who is financing the "global warming advocates"? Obviously, all the scientists being named in these reports are not doing this for free. I'd like to know where their funding is coming from - what are their political leanings? SB: I hear this argument so often, but it never ceases to puzzle me. There is a difference between the $$ going for ads, PR etc and the $$ going to do research in Greenland and Antarctica, to take ice cores, to make atmospheric measurements needed improve climate models, to study the physics of clouds . . . Scientists don't care which way the answer comes out. They guy who disproved global warming would win the jackpot in terms of prestige and reputation. Of course scientists who do climatology are paid, just as cancer researchers and plasma physicists and every other kind of scientist is paid to expand the sum total of human knowledge (and produce cool spinoffs like the internet, lasers, MRIs, CT scans, cell phones . . .) But to equate that with paid propaganda seems ludicrous. Tampa, FL: What is the most common greenhouse gas in the atmosphere? And, what percentage of our atmosphere does CO2 constitute? SB: Water vapor is the most common and most potent GHG. But that's not changing. CO2 is now about 380 parts per million in the atmosphere. Amazing how a little bit can have such profound effects. Alamo, CA: It's outrageous that the so-called "scientific consensus" is given any respect. Wasn't it this same "scientific" community that just 15 years ago were telling us that the next Ice Age was coming? It was as over hyped then as alleged "man made" global warming is now. SB: No, sorry, there was nothing approaching a consensus on an impending ice age. There was nothing like the 17 years of IPCC reports from thousands of scientists, as we have with global warming. It was a hypothesis only, and one that was quickly knocked down. But it makes a good story . . or should I say, myth. Atlanta, GA: Climatology is a very young science, relatively. We don't understand all the forces which control weather or climate. Even modelers admit their work is imperfect at best.Why should we structure the world's economies according to warnings from a young and imperfect science? SB: Your question is how to act in the face of imcomplete knowledge. Do you buy insurance for your home? Wear seat belts? Sometimes one takes precautions---especially those that cost little and/or bring other benefits (see previous answer re breaking our dependence on dodgy sources of oil).

Salve! There is currently a bitter argument over Greek and international media about the possibility that fire-fighters resources may have been deviated to archaeological patrimony with significant detriment for the security of common habitants; vg, from an interview of Giorgios Aidonis, Olympia's major.

Wiltshire Network (Wiltshire.co.uk) By Chris Hooper A RENOWNED archaeologist, who shot to national prominence last year with his amazing discovery of Stonehenge's lost alter stone by a roadside in Berwick St James, now claims to have found the famed lost city of Apollo in the land around Stonehenge. Dennis Price, who is an expert on the history of Stonehenge and who used to work with Wessex Archaeology, believes the lost city of Apollo is located at King's Barrow Ridge, overlooking Stonehenge. The lost city is believed by many to be mythical but, after working with language experts at Exeter University, Mr Price is convinced the city exists and that it is right here on the outskirts of Salisbury. The team painstakingly deciphered the works of an ancient Greek mariner named Pytheas of Massilia. Mr Price explained that Pytheas was known to have visited Britain in around 325 BC and in his chronicles he wrote of the lost city of Apollo and a site similar to Stonehenge. He said: "There is a passage that apparently refers to Stonehenge which has long fascinated people, but there is also a repeated reference made to a city sacred to Apollo which has gone completely unremarked upon." It was this which first intrigued Mr Price and led him to look a little harder at Pytheas' text. And this deeper investigation allowed him to find the exact location of the city. He said: "Just a mile or so to the east of Stonehenge is a gigantic prehistoric earthwork called Vespasian's Camp, named in later years by William Camden, after the same Vespasian who subjugated the south west of England during the Roman invasion of Britain in 43AD. "It is invariably described as an Iron Age hill fort, yet excavations there have shown the existence of far earlier Neolithic pits, while there still exist the remains of early Bronze Age funeral barrows, showing the site was in use while nearby Stonehenge was being constructed. "Vespasian's Camp lies at the bottom of a slope occupied further up by what is known as the King's Barrow Ridge, overlooking Stonehenge, while this is further divided into the New King Barrow and Old King Barrow. "Vespasian's Camp cannot be seen from Stonehenge, but it lies to the east of the ruins, in the direction of the rising sun. As Apollo had largely become thought of as a Sun god by the time Pytheas was writing, it is an obvious connection. "Given the huge scale of the earthworks at Vespasian's Camp, it is not unthinkable that Pytheas may have thought of Troy, another city sacred to or beloved of Apollo, as some later versions of the stories of this place speak of Apollo building the walls there along with Poseidon. "We cannot know precisely how Pytheas came to equate the sanctuary, the temple and the city with Apollo, but it is not unthinkable that some future excavation at Stonehenge might provide evidence of this." For more on this discovery see www.eternalidol.com.

Aug. 24 - A Japanese researcher claims there are ruins of an ancient civilization under the Pacific Ocean. Professor Masaaki Kimura of Ryukyu University claims that underwater rock formations are the remnants of an ancient Asian civilization that disappeared under the sea off the coast of the southwestern tip of Japan. He also believes the legends of the lost continents of Mu, or Lemuria, and Atlantis could have been based on these ruins. Stefanie McIntyre reports.

By Erik Stokstad ScienceNOW Daily News 22 August 2007 Steven LeBlanc has been dreaming about ancient DNA for several decades, but he never had any luck extracting it from museum artifacts. Then, a few years ago, LeBlanc, an archaeologist and collections manager at Harvard University's Peabody Museum in Cambridge, Massachusetts, had a brainstorm. He was staring at drawers full of quids--wads of plant material chewed by ancient Native Americans--when he realized, "Quid ... saliva ... DNA ... DING!" In the September Journal of Field Archaeology, LeBlanc and several co-authors report that they have recovered DNA from 2000-year-old quids, as well as from aprons worn by Native Americans. The quids and aprons belonged to a vanished tribe that archaeologists call the Western Basketmakers. Between about 500 B.C.E. and 500 C.E., they lived in caves and rock shelters in what is now southern Utah and northern Arizona. Dry conditions are ideal for preserving DNA, and researchers have previously extracted ancient DNA from skeletons and feces of both humans and animals (ScienceNOW, 16 July 1998). After getting the idea to test quids, LeBlanc teamed up with Thomas Benjamin, a cancer biologist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, and other researchers. They pulled mitochondrial DNA from 48 quids and from 18 aprons that had been stained with what was likely menstrual blood. Then they scanned the DNA for various molecular markers called haplogroups, which appear in different frequencies in different parts of the world. LeBlanc and his colleagues found that about 14% of these samples contained haplogroup A. This haplogroup is extremely rare in the Southwest, but it occurs in about half of the population of Central America. The intermediate frequency in the sample of Western Basketmakers fits with the idea that they migrated from somewhere in central Mexico, bringing agriculture into the turf of foragers. The results were confirmed by a second laboratory, and LeBlanc says the absence of European haplogroups rules out the possibility of contamination. The larger conclusion is that museum artifacts can provide a new source of data. Quids are common in collections, notes Connie Mulligan of the University of Florida, Gainesville, although aprons less so. Next, the team hopes to sample other textiles, samples, and cigarettes made from hollow reeds. "It's a neat and novel application," says Anne Stone, an ancient DNA expert at Arizona State University in Tempe. She notes that testing artifacts may be especially important when Native American tribes are reluctant to allow sampling of their ancestors' skeletons Canyon de Chelly, where the aprons came from More about ancient DNA from human feces

By NICHOLAS PAPHITIS, Associated Press Writer Fri Aug 24, 11:24 PM ET ATHENS, Greece - Archaeologists excavating a sprawling prehistoric fortress in southern Greece have discovered a secret underground passage thought to have supplied the site with water in times of danger Dating to the mid-13th century B.C., the stone passage passed under the massive walls of the Mycenaean citadel of Midea and probably led to a nearby water source, authorities said Friday. The passage would allow the people of Midea, about 93 miles south of Athens, safe access to drinkable water even in times of enemy attack."It is a very important discovery, which gave us great joy," excavation director Katie Demakopoulou said. Only three such networks

This photo provided by the Institute for Exploration and Institute for Archaeological Oceanography shows ancient amphorae discovered in the Black Sea off the coast of Turkey at a depth of approximately 340 meters By RANDOLPH E. SCHMID, AP Science Writer Fri Aug 24, 7:50 PM ET WASHINGTON - Undersea explorer Robert Ballard leans back and smiles at the screens arrayed above his desk. One displays a view of a remote operating vessel, another scans along a seafloor never before viewed by humans. It's the Black Sea, not far from Ukraine, a region long closed to outsiders and now yielding a treasure trove of Byzantine vessels that met their ends 1,000 or more years ago. For Ballard the archaeologist, those vessels and their contents are a delight.For Ballard the explorer, the modern technology he's testing for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is pretty exciting, too. Thanks to the massive speed of modern communications, talking to him from a desk in Silver Spring, Md., while he is aboard the research vessel Alliance in the Black Sea is almost as simple as talking to him in person. And that's the idea. Ballard is testing a system planned for use aboard NOAA's new vessel Okeanos Explorer, scheduled to go to sea next year as the first U.S. government vessel dedicated to exploring unknown parts of the ocean. Read more at Yahoo! NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration

Fight to save Olympic birthplace The Greek fires are seen from space in this Nasa picture Map of affected areas The hill of Kronos, overlooking Olympia, was engulfed by fire "This is complete hell. The front is 30km long and has now reached the first houses" Petros Filippou Mayor of Kalyvia, Athens Read more at BBC. Authorities in Greece have intensified efforts to find out what caused forest fires that have left more than 60 dead.

Salve! Here is the first part of the talk transcripte of Newsweek's Senior editor Sharon Begley Live Talk on Wednesday, August 8, at noon, ET, about climate change denial and its lasting pervasiveness. If you think those who have long challenged the mainstream scientific findings about global warming recognize that the ame is over, think again. Since the late 1980s, this well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change, writes Sharon Begley in her cover on the global warming "deniers." Through advertisements, op-eds, lobbying and media attention, greenhouse doubters argued first that the world is not warming; measurements indicating otherwise are flawed, they said. Then they claimed that any warming is natural, not caused by human activities. Now they contend that the looming warming will be minuscule and harmless. "They patterned what they did after the tobacco industry," says former senator Tim Wirth, who spearheaded environmental issues as an under secretary of State in the Clinton administration. "Both figured, sow enough doubt, call the science uncertain and in dispute. That's had a huge impact on both the public and Congress." Indeed it has. Just last year, polls found that 64 percent of Americans thought there was "a lot" of scientific disagreement on climate change; only one third thought planetary warming was "mainly caused by things people do." Join Begley for an hour-long Live Talk on Wednesday, August 8, at noon, ET, to discuss the strength of the denial machine, the impact of the campaign by contrarian scientists and what you feel should be done about addressing climate change. Amsterdam: Is it fair to blame the "deniers" of today? The first time I read about global warming was in the 1980s. We collectively ignored the problem for two decades. SB: The late 1980s is indeed when the issue reached the public consciousness, and also when one prominent climatologist was willing to go public and say that climate was showing the consequences of greenhouse warming even then. That's why I started the story in 1988; the campaign to undermine the science has been going on from the beginning. Today's deniers--I'll even call them by their preferred "skeptics"--are arguably more pernicious, however, because as the scientific case has become stronger they have gotten only shriller, more desperate and more illogical. If "we" ignored the problem for 20 years, it was largely because the public was fooled. Alexandria, VA: Why didn't the real climate scientists defend their work more publicly when the deniers attacked it through the years? SB: Excellent question. Scientists--those who do actual bench research rather than sit at their word processors and critique the actual research--simply stink at this. They defend their work in scientific forums, but in public they turn wishy-washy. For instance, no decent scientist will ever say a case is closed (even the law of gravity is only as sound as the next experiment), but that's what they're called on to do when scientific issues become political ones. I agree with your implication: the naysayers are just a lot better at PR. Scottsdale, AR: Is there a realistic possibility of states and even foreign governments suing the deniers and delayers because mitigation, damage and adaptation costs will be exponentially greater as a direct result of their obstruction? SB: Interesting question. I wouldn't bet on it, but maybe there's a creative lawyer out there who thinks someone should be held accountable when coastal communities vanish, droughts turn agricultural areas into deserts and intense storms cause billions in damage. On the other hand, the ultimate source of greenhouse emisisons is you and me. It's more likely, it seems to me, that our kids and grandkids are going to be really, really annoyed at the world we handed them. White Stone, Va.: How can the responsible media best meet their "fairness/accuracy/'balance'" responsibilities in dealing with climate change deniers? SB: We haven't figured that out, have we? In my case, whether it's climate change or the latest fossil find, I believe that only those who do research in the given field are qualified to comment. Further, I don't think science is like political or social issues, where all views are of equal weight. To the contrary: in science, there really is a 'right' answer, tho it may take time to emerge, and journalists have a duty to tell readers what that answer is likely to be. Me, I don't do he said/she said, but delve into the arguments and see which has empirical merit. It's not that hard. Woodbridge, Va: Why are you trying to muddle the distinction between "global warming" and "man-made global warming"? Most scientists believe global warming is occurring but they diverge on what is causing it - naturally occuring solar activity or man? Ten thousand years ago there were glaciers in the Mississippi Valley, what caused them to disappear? SB: Absolutely; that distinction is critical. But there are ways to tell. Anthropogenic climate change leaves distinct fingerprints in the atmosphere and on the ground, different from what, say, a hotter sun would do. The 2007 IPCC report (http://www.ipcc.ch/) went into this at great length, and concluded in its 'fingerprints' chapter than there is a 90+% certainty that human activities are changing the climate. Of course there are also natural forces that alter climate, as you imply: ice ages come and go based on earth's orbital changes, for instance. But does the existence of natural 'forcings,' as they're called, mean we can ignore the human input? I've never understood that logic. West Chester, PA: Will the most recent computer models that the IPCC scientists use for climate modeling be released to the general public so they can be independently verified? SB: The IPCC does not develop its own models, or even do its own empirical research. Instead, it scrutinizes all the published literature in the field. That of course includes model runs, such as those at the UK's Hadley Center, and those in the US at NOAA---a dozen or so in all. It's not like it's some big dark secret you need a password to get into. It's all in the published literature; get the IPCC's latest report on the physical science basis for climate change (http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html) and see for yourself. Milwaukee, WI: Who are the scientists that make up the so called "broad consensus" you mentioned in your lead in article? How many of them are true climatologists? SB: It always surprises me that, with all the coverage of this issue, this remains misunderstood. When people refer to a consensus they usually mean the IPCC (see previous answer for link). The IPCC brings together thousands of scientists from governments, business, enviro groups and academia, and yes, they are real researchers, not armchair critics. Every word of every sentence has to pass rigorous scrutiny, including by scientists who carp about the consensus. San Diego, CA: My question is: If scientists are labeled "skeptics" because part of their funding comes from the oil industry, does this make their scientific argument or observation irrelevant? I have read "A skeptics Guide to AN Inconvenient Truth" by Marlo Lewis and feel that he raises numerous questions concerning consensus on global warming and of the science referred to in Al Gore's book and movie. I believe these questions need to be addressed from scientists before they are presented to policy makers. During the build up to the current Iraq war, skeptics were dismissed as deniers, kooks, and of being misinformed. After 4 years of war the skeptics view now seems to have been right given the real information we have learned during this time. If a vote for war was to be taken today I am certain there would be a different choice taken. The question of human contribution to Global Warming seems to be taking the same path. We are told that the debate is over. All scientists have agreed except for the deniers, kooks and the misinformed. This all sounds familiar except that now the very premise of science and the scientific method is being ignored. The job of a scientist is to always question and attempt to prove something to be false. Richard King SB: 'Skeptic' is a compliment, as far as I'm concerned. Scientists should be, and are, skeptical, for the reasons you note. Notice I never said in this story or any other that 'the debate is over;' in science, it never is. The quesiton is whether the science is sound, whether it has been converging on a single conclusion, and finally whether the preponderance of evidence is sufficient to justify policy steps. When those steps bring other benefits---less dependence on Saudi and Venezeulan oil, anyone?---the scales tip even further. Also, it is wrong to think that the 'skeptics'' arguments have gone unanswered. One group of climate researchers does this very well, at http://www.realclimate.org/. Orlando, Florida: Are the motives surrounding climate change denial purely economic? SB: Not if I can believe my email. A huge fount of opposition to the emerging science seems driven by ideology as much as, or more than, money. Did you know, for instance, that what I wrote is 'nice propoganda there by your Liberal superiors (that control what line reporters like ur self type,' that this is a plot to bring about 'worldwide redistribution of wealth,' that 'i'll believe in global warming when rich hollywood types step out of their suvs,' etc. After the US won the cold war, environmentalism became the new communism. It would take a better psychologist, or sociologist, than I to explain why. Portland, OR: Do you think we can turn this around (global warming) given that the U.S. is a 'me first' vs. a 'we first' society; and that China and India want to be like us? SB: China just surpassed the US in carbon emissions, so we're in trouble. No, the US cannot go it alone, but as long as we remain outside the process to which Europe, Japan, Russia and 100+ other nations have signed on to, little will happen. If you look at the numbers, in fact, it's hard to see how we can reduce carbon emissions enough, fast enough, to stave off significant climate change. That's why I've written several times about the need to develop carbon sequestration--ways to suck the stuff out of the air so that if the climate system starts tipping into a catastrophic state, we have an out.

Salve! *Actually, Newsweek does not deny the existence of global warming. But, this issue (August 8, 2007) does have a story about "well-funded naysayers," who don't believe it's that big of a deal.

Leicester?

Once again, gratiam habeo. I wasn't aware. IOU another. 8 pages, huh? I must admit it may take me a little time.

Plain English: the gifted friends of Sulla couldn't have been more than a tiny fraction of the thousands of Sulla

Sulla may have been friendly, but I seriously doubt his gifted friends could be counted by thousands, not even hundreds. This elite is which may have been worried by the luxurious banquets. Sulla's veterans were literally legions. The mere existence of the many

Salve, VTC. That's because this list comes from 1851, 63 years before the beginning of WWI and 88 years before WWII.

Salve, WW! Yes, indeed! This place is Allianoi, ancient spa recently discovered, mentioned by the 2nd century orator and medicinal writer Aelius Aristides

If we read carefully your excellent posts, maybe you should read carefully the digression: your entire ciceronian quotation is within it; and there's a reason for that. Briefly: Pleeease, it's the sworn enemy of these veterans and one of the most brilliant orators of all time who is talking; he obviously wants his audience (the roman people) to believe that the debts of several thousand people, including several thousand veterans (roman citizens, by definition. who BTW fought against Mithridates and other foreign enemies), are "extravagant", even when they proved to be more than willing to die courageously even for the chance to ameliorate their situation (by Sallust's description, no less). Do you really think they were risking their lives for "luxurious banquets" simply because Cicero told you so? Is that all the critical you can be with the Second Catilinarian?

Nope, try again. Nice assumption, BTW. I can help you no more.

Salve! Here is another candidate, the Laetoli footprints and also a rare Roman footprint.

Then we repeat the quotation The second Oration of M.T. Cicero against Lucius Catilina. addressed to the People. Chapter XX: "There is a third class, already touched by age, but still vigorous from constant exercise (16 years after Sulla!); of which class is Manlius himself; whom Catiline is now succeeding. These are men of those colonies which Sulla established at Faesulae, which I know to be composed, on the whole, of excellent citizens and brave men; but yet these are colonists, who, from becoming possessed of unexpected and sudden wealth, boast themselves extravagantly and insolently; these men, while they build like rich men, while they delight in farms, in litters, in vast families of slaves, in luxurious banquets, have incurred such great debts, that, if they would be saved, they must raise Sulla from the dead" Cicero was not defending these men, they were "the enemy"; consequently, he found their debts "extravagant", "insolent" and "luxurious". He was addressing the citizens of Rome to support him, not the veterans. That's for the "impoverishment. The "general" was one of my mistakes, trying (badly) to quote you (post # 45); I can only infer that its magnitude was enough for being one of the six "classes of men those forces are made up" (criminis auctores; ibid, Ch. XVII). Please note that of the other five classes, three were also impoverished by "extravagant" debts: The first (ibid, Ch XVIII): "There is one class of them, who, with enormous debts, have still greater possessions, and who can by no means be detached from their affection to them." (Clearly, this is the only class with "still greater possessions"); the second (ibid, Ch. XIX): "There is another class of them, who, although they are harassed by debt, yet are expecting supreme power; they wish to become masters."; the fouth class (ibid, Ch. XXI) "various, promiscuous and turbulent; who indeed are now overwhelmed...by old debts; and worn out with bail bonds, and judgments, and seizures of their goods". The sixth class consists of Catiline personal friends; the fifth (ibid, Ch. XXII): " parricides, assassins, in short of all infamous characters" don't appear to need, according to Cicero, any other incentive to risk their lives under Catiline (A common argument in Social Wars, BTW). Then, the incentive for the vast majority of rebels (thousands) was economic because of their "extravagant" debts. The proportion of Sulla's veterans among the rebels was certainly high : (Plutarch, Vita Cicero, Ch. XIV): "It was the old soldiers of Sulla, however, who were most of all urging Catiline on to action. These were to be found in all parts of Italy, but the greatest numbers and the most warlike of them had been scattered among the cities of Etruria... with Mallius for a leader, one of the men who had served with distinction under Sulla, associated themselves with Catiline and came to Rome to take part in the consular elections." (ergo, they were enough to affect the outcome of the elections). And when Catiline "marched to join Mallius... about twenty thousand men altogether had been collected" (ibid, Ch. XVI). Sallust also attested both the size of Catiline's army and its high proportion of veteran soldiers: (Bellum Catilinae, Ch. LVI): " While this was taking place in Rome, Catiline combined the forces which he had brought with him with those which Mallius already had, and formed two legions, filling up the cohorts so far as the number of his soldiers permitted. Then distributing among them equally such volunteers or conspirators as came to the camp, he soon completed the full quota of the legions, although in the beginning he had no more than two thousand men. But only about a fourth part of the entire force was provided with regular arms (most if not all of them should have been soldiers). The others carried whatever weapons chance had given them; namely, javelins or lances, or in some cases pointed stakes (some of them may also had been unlucky veterans)." And the "extravagant" debts were a very good fighting incentive indeed: (ibid, Ch. LXI): "When the battle was ended it became evident what boldness and resolution had pervaded Catiline's army. For almost every man covered with his body, when life was gone, the position which he had taken when alive at the beginning of the conflict. " The size of the Republican Army of Marcus Petreius that faced Cailine's forces at Pistoria (2/3 legions) is also an indirect evidence of its enemies' strength. All that said, for being a significant contributing factor to social instability, the impoverishment of any population requires to be frequent, (ie, huge in absolute numbers), not necessarily general (ie, irrespective of its relative number). For discussing about the evidence of the impoverishment of other Roman veterans during the Civil wars of the I Century BC, I think we would require another post.

Nope. I think it's time for some hints. 1. The elements of the complex seen on this pic have come to light only until around 2003. 2. It is very close (some 12 milles) to another Roman site mentioned as an answer for this pic on this thread. Good luck!

You would be wrong. I know of no scholarship indicating that Sulla's veterans were generally impoverished. Of course, some probably were--the drunkards, spendthrifts, gamblers, and the like. But of the thousands of soldiers who served under Sulla, only a tiny proportion lifted a finger to help Catiline. I have as little pity for Sulla's cut-throats as I do for Cinna's and Caesar's. But not for Caesar's cut-throats, it seems; (you appear to be using "cut-throat" and "roman soldier" as synonyms; you may have a point, who knows). Cicero may be a good scholar to begin with; the same who called these cut-throats "excellent citizens and brave men". I think the generally impoverishment would have affected Roman veterans in general, not specifically the Sullans. That would be the main reason that made them risk their lives under Mallius and Catiline. In fact, I dare to infer that at 63 BC (691 AUC, sixteen years after Sulla's dictatorship) many Roman veterans must have been Sullans. The tiny proportion of soldiers that lifted a finger should include at least the original 2000 Mallius' soldiers (not 300), most of them settled at the area around Etruria. Cicero was probably right to fear the risk of the rebellion's dissemination.

The impoverishment of Sulla's veterans was a personal issue, not a social one. Sulla's were more than amply rewarded for their "service". Last time I saw, personal issues multiplied some thousands times could make social issues. The impoverishment of Sulla's veterans was a social one because it affected (and was affected by) society as a whole. For one, veterans