Big Famine Moon

                                                                                                                                                                  Up, Down.                        Full Moon 

---

Contents:   Software:(BookOS, Caveat I (Douglas Adams), Open Source, Caveat II, Handel), ppm & ppb, Honey Bees vs Neonicotinoids, Confusion, Beyond the Zero, Bit of News, Coming Up Soon.

---

Big Famine Moon will be full at 5am; aka Crow Moon, Crust Moon, Sugar Moon, Sap Moon, Chaste Moon, Death Moon, Worm Moon, Lenten Moon; & for Hindus, Holi.

A simple confluence of two cosmic events, one solar and one lunar - spring equinox & the full moon ... one really, since every cosmic event has a full moon somewhere within a few weeks - and what do we get? (Another year older and deeper in debt.) Myths of death defeated and life renewed; some in anticipation: Tibetan New Year, Chinese New Year, Bahá'í annual fast and New Year ... (a long list ... Nowruz); some on the date: Holi ... and Easter of course, spanning the zone (or trying to put it in parentheses).

And a confluence of tendencies too: religious co-opting of human physiobiology - the bone-deep flavour of certain irrefutable psychology in our intimate relations with Terra spliced into (essentially Fascist) doctrine. A veritable harmonic convergence!

	Romeo:      Lady, by yonder blessed moon I swear      That tips with silver all these fruit-tree tops— Juliet:      O, swear not by the moon, the inconstant moon,      That monthly changes in her circled orb,      Lest that thy love prove likewise variable.                                                                         Act II scene 2.

The music is Outlaw Blues; and then (another one from early days) Sixteen Tons: Merle Travis in the mid 50s, and again in the 70s or 80s (he died in 83); and by Tennessee Ernie Ford. 

---

BookOS!

[Some things do come clear in the murk, often too late to do any good - I should have followed through on Ryerson's system courses while I could still do them.   :-)   I let that silly woman put me off. ... Oh well.]

A friend mentioned Philip Wylie, two books: The Disappearance and Generation of Vipers; and I wanted to follow it up and ... Lo and Behold! Google steered me to BookOS. Two million books including most of Thomas Pynchon, Charles Taylor's 'A Secular Age', Stephen Gardiner's 'A Perfect Moral Storm', some Northrop Frye ... The interface has some limits - you can't search for all by a specific author easily f'rinstance - but the 'direction' of the interface seems right: towards simplicity, good pop-up window management, language support.

This ranks for me with Wikipedia. It almost makes me hold my breath waiting for the copyright bullies & tyrants to attack it.

And a companion site BookSC (not so much, see below for a test).

It doesn't do to try to read things electronically, just doesn't - those people with e-readers on streetcars busses and trains are ... only pretending to read, and if anyone cared and measured comprehension we could all know this; but electronic copies make some of the very important secondary activity around reading orders of magnitude easier. Particularly quoting accurately during discussions; but also, for (possible) Alz' sufferers, a quick way to verify that some notion actually did come from some book. 

---

Caveat I: (Good from far but far from good.)    As I was writing this I took a break and came across something in the NYT: Iceland Baffled by Chinese Plan for Golf Resort. Didn't baffle me: aside from the obvious oil & other commercial alignments, playing golf at the edge of an active volcano, or at least with a volcano in sight, makes perfect sense. I remembered Douglas Adams' 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe' but unfortunately these books are no longer on my shelf so ... naturally, I went looking for it in BookOS. Here's some of what I found:

That's the thing about pdfs - the severe conversion problems - and provenance. Not one of these BookOS offerings looks like it was scanned - they were all (almost certainly) converted from some other format, more-or-less successfully. So I thought ... Google Books! - they use scans surely. Here are comparable pages in some of what I found:

Same schtick. There are no gross mistakes in what I have shown here - but trust me, you inevitably find fragmentary HTML showing up, usually in the vicinity of missing sentences, paragraphs ... who knows? Sometimes it works the other way too - you buy a 'print on demand' and find mistakes created by scanning software. And it is nothing new - there are lots of typos, some quite serious, in the KJV.                         So what. 

---

And Open Source:

I have always disliked Adobe. Never quite on spec, difficult to Copy&Paste from, difficult to search, very expensive to modify ... In the experience with BookOS I came across several new formats - open formats with open readers to accompany. So I downloaded a few and played around with them.

All good ... and if you have nothing else to do, or if your energies are consistently directed at learning new (arcane & eminently forgettable) details, then ... even better. 

---

Caveat II:    A corollary of Caveat I possibly, or concommitant ... intimately connected let's say.

The advantage of a standard, even a de-facto one like pdf, is that you get to know it and don't have to re-learn it repeatedly. Efficient use of time and all that.

So, a tradeoff then: many open-source replacements, each with advantages - smaller file size etc. - but each with bugs and quirks and shortcomings too. 

---

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.                                                                           Isaiah 53:6.

It begs an addendum to the background Musak® for this post: 'All We Like Sheep' from Handel's Messiah; a version on Vimeo, and one on YouTube showing the choir & orchestra.

[And on the strength of that I go out to The Messiah for Easter at Knox Presbyterian church over on Spadina. It is always thrilling to witness a choir and orchestra working together more-or-less humbly - and indeed, there are some sublime moments in this performance. Unfortunately the music and KJV texts are not enough for the leaders of the gig, Rev. Reinders and the choirmaster Roger Bergs. They have to interrupt with commentary throughout, paraphrasing and recapitulating - redundant sententious nonsense. Trying to understand why they are doing such a thing the best I can imagine is a hard-core Presbyterian fear of any un-certified aesthetic transcendence. (There is worse but I'll spare you.) But really - second guessing Handel & Lancelot Andrewes? Doh! No wonder these churches are empty and being recycled into condos.] 

---

(Still) trying to find simple (minded) rules of thumb around ppm & ppb:

Wikipedia gives a 'drop', and says, "in medicine, IV drips deliver 10, 15, or 20 drops per mL for macrodrip, 60 per mL for microdrip." A simple average makes it 25 drops/mL.

A million drops then is 40,000 mL, 40 litres, ~10 US gallons: so ... one drop in ten US gallons is ~1 part per million (ppm). And a billion drops is ~10,500 US gallons: so ... 3 drops in a tank car is ~1 part per billion (ppb). (A tank car is ~35,000 US gallons according to 49 CFR 179.13 in the US Code of Federal Regulations on tank car capacity.)

Another way to go after it is time: 1 million seconds is ~11½ days, call it two weeks: so a second a week is ~2 ppm, or a second a month ~½ ppm. 1 billion seconds is about 32 years: so ... two seconds in a lifetime is something like 1 ppb.

Or how many molecules of H₂O in a drop? Goes by weight. The density of water is 1g/mL so a drop is .04g. Take the molar mass, 18g/mol for water and compute .04g/18g = .0022 moles in a drop; multiplied by Avogadro's number (6.022x10²³ molecules per mole) to get 1.32x10²¹ molecules. 1 ppm is then 1.32x10¹⁵ - many, a lot, too many to count; and 1 ppb is 1.32x10¹²; not intuitively useful numbers.

What about drops in a human body? An average human is 70 kg/150 pounds, close to the density of water makes it 1¾ million drops: so 2 drops is ~1 ppm and 1/500th of a drop ~1 ppb.

Getting there ... tiny amounts but very many molecules in 'em (and we have come full circle). I hope exercises like this are being done in high-school physics courses; probably not.

[If I told you how often I re-calculated these numbers to get even vaguely confident in them ... I won't. But don't trust me, do the sums yourself; and then consider that <5 ppb BPA in their water stops reproduction in trout. (This article is in BookSC.)] 

---

Honey Bee vs Neonicotinoid (again):    Last year it was news. In March a Guardian article Pesticides linked to honeybee decline, referring to two (then) recent studies:
1) Pesticide Decreases Foraging Success and Survival in Honey Bees:

Nonlethal exposure of honey bees to thiamethoxam (neonicotinoid systemic pesticide) causes high mortality due to homing failure at levels that could put a colony at risk of collapse. Simulated exposure events on free-ranging foragers labeled with a radio-frequency identification tag suggest that homing is impaired by thiamethoxam intoxication. These experiments offer new insights into the consequences of common neonicotinoid pesticides used worldwide.

2) Pesticide Reduces Bumble Bee Colony Growth and Queen Production:

We exposed colonies of the bumble bee Bombus terrestris in the laboratory to field-realistic levels of the neonicotinoid imidacloprid, then allowed them to develop naturally under field conditions. Treated colonies had a significantly reduced growth rate and suffered an 85% reduction in production of new queens compared with control colonies.

And again in October: Evidence of pesticide harm to bees is now overwhelming, referring to an article in Nature:
3) Combined pesticide exposure severely affects ... traits in bees:

Here we show that chronic exposure of bumblebees to two pesticides (neonicotinoid and pyrethroid) at concentrations that could approximate field-level exposure impairs natural foraging behaviour and increases worker mortality leading to significant reductions in brood development and colony success. We found that worker foraging performance, particularly pollen collecting efficiency, was significantly reduced with observed knock-on effects for forager recruitment, worker losses and overall worker productivity. Moreover, we provide evidence that combinatorial exposure to pesticides increases the propensity of colonies to fail.

BookSC was not much help in finding the source documents. 1) is there; 2) seems to be there but the download gives something else; and, 3) is not there at all. So ... one in three. ... It may improve with use. 

---

I eventually found them elsewhere: 2) Neonicotinoid Pesticide Reduces Bumble Bee Colony Growth and Queen Production, and, 3) Combined pesticide exposure severely affects individual- and colony-level traits in bees.

---

What I really really REALLY REALLY   do not understand is how most people go on about their lives as if none of this were happening? When I see friends and family getting onto airplanes to go south and get warm - it's not a judgement, I tell you true, but I am shocked, dismayed. As for the politicians and business people, successful ones, admired and respected, who must know what is happening - I am unable to imagine a scenario for them. Their bureaucrats may be driven and confused to stupidity - but Stephen Harper is not stupid; nor Barack Obama; nor these 'honourable' ministers: Peter Kent, Joe Oliver, John Baird; this woman in Alberta - Alison Redford; Rex Tillerson, the Koch brothers David and Charles ...

WHAT THE FUCK'S GOIN' ON HERE?! 

I can understand some struggle over exactly what to do, how best to tackle this enormous problem of which the honey bees are a small part, sure. But ... short of rekindling a superstitious belief in evil and devils I am stumped. All I can come up with is the possibility of some tipping point within the 'social imaginary' (as Charles Taylor calls it) that may trip in their minds and permit them to begin to think properly. Soon I hope.

Lame I know. ... Some time ago I posted a link to the video of Elizabeth May saying, "Any honest person who has looked at this science should be screaming from the rooftops!"; yet she sits in Ottawa (as I sit here) ... doing busy work.
 ?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡
¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?
!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿
¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!

---

¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!¡?¿!Back with the 360's & 370's when you tried to divide by zero or multiply a number by a text string you would get an exception and a core dump. Some of us got pretty good at reading hex.

---

Dissemblers, hypocrites, thieves, liars, even murderers, rapists, torturers; even the burnt ones with nothing left - I have some idea of how these things work, can work, could work, might work - but this makes so little sense I cannot fathom it. I don't understand kiddie-diddlers either gentle reader. So ...

Maybe Paul Rose understood. D'you think? He died a few weeks ago. Some of the dimwits are trying to lionize him now. You have to laugh.

Here, try the Outlaw Blues again: "Don't ask me nothin' about nothin', I just might tell you the truth." 'Cept in this case I don't know a thing about it.

Be well. 

---

Beyond the Zero:    A few more words about 'Against the Day'. (I will have to re-read that last chapter again before I write this; hang on a sec ...)

One could expect to find important things in the last chapter - Deuce Kindred was summarily gotten rid of in the previous one, we do not see Lew Basnight again - what I pick out are four: 1) who remains - Merle & Dally, Dally & Kit, Reef & Yashmeen, Frank & Stray, Yashmeen & Stray, Ljubica & Jesse, The Chums of Chance & consorts, Pugnax & Ksenija ... all in pairs more-or-less, except Professor Heino Vanderjuice, an odd person to encounter (and he disappears, a version of the author perhaps); 2) Yashmeen's sexuality; 3) the cover image explained, una picchiata!; and, 4) Stray's (?) notion of 'good unsought and uncompensated'. There are more: simultaneity, technology, vegetarianism, the Inconvenience becoming its own destination ... but these four stand out for me (for various reasons no doubt).

A memorable sentence: "It is no longer a matter of gravity—it is an acceptance of sky." A-and the last paragraph goes like this:

Pugnax and Ksenija’s generations—at least one in every litter will follow a career as a sky-dog—have been joined by those of other dogs, as well as by cats, birds, fish, rodents, and less-terrestrial forms of life. Never sleeping, clamorous as a nonstop feast day, Inconvenience, once a vehicle of sky-pilgrimage, has transformed into its own destination, where any wish that can be made is at least addressed, if not always granted. For every wish to come true would mean that in the known Creation, good unsought and un-compensated would have evolved somehow, to become at least more accessible to us. No one aboard Inconvenience has yet observed any sign of this. They know—Miles is certain—it is there, like an approaching rainstorm, but invisible. Soon they will see the pressure gauge begin to fall. They will feel the turn in the wind. They will put on smoked goggles for the glory of what is coming to part the sky. They fly toward grace.

Shekhinah perhaps, שכינה.

That's it gentle reader. The effort I put into editing the teasers for presentation in HTML may seem wasted, could be; at least what is there is more easily searched with CTRL-F and grabbed with Copy&Paste ... and I am more intimately acquainted with Pynchon's style - so it was useful in that way. And I did not notice one single typo. (!)

The collection of teasers:
                         One: The Light Over the Ranges part 5 - Lew Basnight becomes a detective,
                         Two: Iceland Spar part 12 - Lake Traverse marries Deuce Kindred.
                         Three: Bilocations part 5 - Yashmeen Halfcourt & Cyprian Latewood.
                         Three: Bilocations part 6 - Kit Traverse on the S.S. Stupendica (short excerpt).
                         Three: Bilocations part 12 - Lew Basnight encounters Lamont Replevin (excerpt).
                         Three: Bilocations part 17 - Kit Traverse's choice (excerpt).
                         Four: Against the Day part 4 - Yashmeen & Auberon Halfcourt (excerpt).
                         Four: Against the Day part 7 - overture and possibility (short excerpt).
                         Four: Against the Day part 11 - A trio (an excerpt some may find salacious).
A-and Entropy. 

---

Gleanings from the Bin: (Digging about in the oyster-shell midden near the shore.)

* Coast Guard rescuer describes ‘eerie’ scene where Queen of the North sank.
  Karl Lilgert is now on trial for criminal negligence causing death.
  Previously: March 2006, June 2006, May 2007, March 2008.
* Windfarm sickness spreads by word of mouth, Australian study finds (I knew that).
* World Bank told to investigate links to Ethiopia 'villagisation' project (that too).
* Índios e ribeirinhos fazem nova ocupação de canteiro de obra de Belo Monte (source Xingu Vivo).
  Natives and river-side people (fishermen) occupy Belo Monte work sites again. Good on 'em!
- It looks like the cops grabbed one of the demonstrators: PF prende ativista em Belo Monte.
  Seu paradeiro é desconhecido. / His whereabouts are unknown.
- And they are bringing in the army to ensure that this Belo Monte abomination gets built.
  (The Amazônia website is down at the moment - ructions with Cyberbunker apparently - ... link to follow.)
  Força Nacional tenta impedir novas paralisações das obras de Belo Monte, source Agência Brasil.
* This: SA troops killed in Central African Republic: Why, Mr President?, may appear parochial.
  More from Reuters: U.N. chief condemns rebel seizure of power in Central African Republic, and
  NYT: President Is Said to Flee as Rebels Seize Capital of the Central African Republic.
  Another failed state and it has been for quite a while (I didn't know that).
  But nothing on Joseph Kony. What about him? Wasn't he active in Central African Republic?
- The thing about the Daily Maverick newsletter which distinguishes it from all others, puts it in a class by itself,
       is that it includes (up front, at the top) links to other news organizations with relevant stories.
* Even Zimbabwe’s new constitution is waiting for Mugabe to die.
- EU suspends sanctions against most Zimbabwe officials.
- (From 2011 mind you) Marange diamond field: Zimbabwe torture camp discovered.
* Marikana: Under oath, Phiyega’s bald-faced lie exposed.
- Marikana: Sangoma’s death and Phiyega’s understanding of truth.
* Steve Biko, Mamphela Ramphele, & Andile Mngxitama, and the
  offending piece by Jared Sacks: Biko would not vote for Ramphele.
* Pension Funds Wary as Bankrupt City Goes to Trial,
  (map showing Stocton, California). Bankrupt in one way ...
* ... and bankrupt in another:
  Los Angeles Frets After Low Turnout to Elect Mayor.
  Just 21 percent of registered voters turned out.
* Frank’s feet of Catholic clay. Last mention here of the new Pope I hope.
* Haiti recycles human waste in fight against cholera epidemic,
  and a link to the US NGO Sustainable Organic Integrated Livelihoods SOIL.
* Chinese Solar Panel Giant Is Tainted by Bankruptcy.
And finally, I don't know what to make of this:
  U.S. Example Offers Hope for Cutting Carbon Emissions. (?) 

---

Coming Up Soon:

Peter Victor - Managing Without Growth: Slower by Design, Not Disaster, April 4th 7pm at UofT.

[I wonder if Joseph Kony is 'related' to Séléka? They must know one another, or at least know of one another. What does Michel Djotodia think of Kony and the Lord's Resistance Army? It won't likely be a high priority for his 'government' to go looking for Kony anytime soon. How different are they, Joseph Kony & Michel Djotodia and his allies? How different are any of them from Francois Bozizé?] 

---

Down.

and His name shall be calléd WONderful, COUNsellor

Up, Down.

For unto us a child is born, Handel's Messiah, London Symphony Orchestra.
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
     Isaiah Chapter 9 Verse 6.

for the record I am not comparing Lula to anyone except possibly other politicians of lesser calibre, here is his speech, with english subtitles, provided by the Brazilian wing of TckTckTck, tictactictac, each part is about 10 minutes:
Part 1. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva discurso em Copenhague dezembro 18 de 2009.
Part 2. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva discurso em Copenhague dezembro 18 de 2009.
and here is the Original webcast at UNFCCC, and the text (from Estadão):

sexta-feira, 18 de dezembro de 2009. Leia na íntegra o discurso de Lula na COP-15 Confira na íntegra o discurso do presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, feito hoje durante sessão plenária de debate informal na 15ª Conferência das Partes da Convenção das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima (COP-15), em Copenhague. O início da fala de Lula foi recuperado pela Agência Estado, pois, por falha técnica, não foi gravado pela Secretaria de Imprensa e Porta-Voz da Presidência da República. "Senhor presidente, senhor secretário geral, senhores e senhoras chefes de Estado, senhores e senhoras chefes de governo, amigos e amigas. Confesso a todos vocês que estou um pouco frustrado. Porque há muito tempo discutimos a questão do clima e cada vez mais constatamos que o problema é mais grave do que nós possamos imaginar. Pensando em contribuir para a discussão nesta conferência, o Brasil teve uma posição muito ousada. Apresentamos as nossas metas até 2020. Assumimos um compromisso e aprovamos no Congresso Nacional, transformando em lei, que o Brasil, até 2020, reduzirá as emissões de gases de efeito estufa de 36,1% a 38,9%, baseado em algumas coisas que nós consideramos importantes: mudança no sistema da agricultura brasileira; mudança no sistema siderúrgico brasileiro; mudança e aprimoramento da nossa matriz energética, que já é uma das mais limpas do mundo, e assumimos o compromisso de reduzir o desmatamento da Amazônia em 80% até 2020. E fizemos isso construindo uma engenharia econômica que obrigará um país em desenvolvimento, com muitas dificuldades econômicas, a gastar até 2020 US$ 166 bilhões, o equivalente a US$ 16 bilhões por ano. Não é uma tarefa fácil, mas foi necessário tomar essas medidas para mostrar ao mundo de que com meias-palavras e com barganhas, a gente não encontraria uma solução nesta Conferência de Copenhague. Tive o prazer de participar ontem à noite, até às duas e meia da manhã, de uma reunião que, sinceramente, eu não esperava participar, porque era uma reunião onde tinha muitos chefes de Estado, figuras das mais proeminentes do mundo político e sinceramente, submeter chefes de Estado a determinadas discussões como nós fizemos antes, há muito tempo eu não assistia. Eu, ontem, estava na reunião e me lembrava do meu tempo de dirigente sindical, quando estávamos negociando com os empresários. E por que é que tivemos essas dificuldades? Porque nós não cuidamos antes de trabalhar com a responsabilidade que era necessário trabalhar. A questão não é apenas dinheiro. Algumas pessoas pensam que apenas o dinheiro resolve o problema. Não resolveu no passado, não resolverá no presente e, muito menos vai resolver no futuro. O dinheiro é importante e os países pobres precisam de dinheiro para manter o seu desenvolvimento, para preservar o meio ambiente, para cuidar das suas florestas. É verdade. Mas é importante que nós, os países em desenvolvimento e os países ricos, quando pensarmos no dinheiro, não pensemos que estamos fazendo um favor, não pensemos que estamos dando uma esmola, porque o dinheiro que vai ser colocado na mesa é o pagamento pela emissão de gases de efeito estufa feita durante dois séculos por quem teve o privilégio de se industrializar primeiro. Não é uma barganha de quem tem dinheiro ou quem não tem dinheiro. É um compromisso mais sério. É um compromisso para saber se é verdadeiro ou não o que os cientistas estão dizendo, que o aquecimento global é irreversível. E de que portanto, quem tem mais recursos e mais possibilidades precisa garantir a contribuição para proteger os mais necessitados. Todo mundo se colocou de acordo que precisamos garantir os 2% de aquecimento global até 2050. Até aí, todos estamos de acordo. Todo mundo está consciente de que só é possível construirmos esse acordo se os países assumirem, com muita responsabilidade, as suas metas. E mesmo as metas, que deveriam ser uma coisa mais simples, tem muita gente querendo barganhar as metas. Todos nós poderíamos oferecer um pouco mais se tivéssemos assumido boa vontade nos últimos períodos. Todos nós sabemos de que é preciso, para manter o compromisso das metas e para manter o compromisso do financiamento, a gente em qualquer documento que for aprovado aqui, a gente tem que manter os princípios adotados no Protocolo de Quioto e os princípios adotados na Convenção-Quadro. Porque é verdade que nós temos responsabilidades comuns, mas é verdade que elas são diferenciadas. Eu não me esqueço nunca que quando tomei posse em 2003, o meu compromisso era tentar garantir que cada brasileiro ou brasileira pudesse tomar café de manhã, almoçar e jantar. Para o mundo desenvolvido, isso era coisa do passado. Para a África, para a América Latina e para muitos países asiáticos, ainda é coisa do futuro. E isso está ligado à discussão que estamos fazendo aqui, porque não é discutir apenas a questão do clima. É discutir desenvolvimento e oportunidades para todos os países. Eu tive conversas com líderes importantes e cheguei à conclusão de que era possível construir uma base política que pudesse explicar ao mundo que nós, presidentes e primeiros-ministros e especialistas, somos muito responsáveis e que iríamos encontrar uma solução. Ainda acredito, porque eu sou excessivamente otimista. Mas é preciso que a gente faça um jogo, não pensando em ganhar ou perder. É verdade que os países que derem dinheiro têm o direito de exigir a transparência, têm direito até de exigir o cumprimento da política que foi financiada. Mas é verdade que nós precisamos tomar muito cuidado com essa intrusão nos países em desenvolvimento e nos países mais pobres. A experiência que nós temos, seja do Fundo Monetário Internacional ou seja do Banco Mundial nos nossos países, não é recomendável que continue a acontecer no século XXI. O que nós precisamos ... e vou dizer, de público, uma coisa que eu não disse ainda no meu país, não disse à minha bancada e não disse ao meu Congresso: se for necessário fazer um sacrifício a mais, o Brasil está disposto a colocar dinheiro também para ajudar os outros países. Estamos dispostos a participar do financiamento se nós nos colocarmos de acordo numa proposta final, aqui neste encontro. Agora, o que nós não estamos de acordo é que as figuras mais importantes do planeta Terra assinem qualquer documento, para dizer que nós assinamos documento. Eu adoraria sair daqui com o documento mais perfeito do mundo assinado. Mas se não tivemos condições de fazer até agora - eu não sei meu querido companheiro Rasmussen, meu companheiro Ban Ki-moon - se a gente não conseguiu fazer até agora esse documento, eu não sei se algum anjo ou algum sábio descerá neste plenário e irá colocar na nossa cabeça a inteligência que nos faltou até a hora de agora. Não sei. Eu acredito, como eu acredito em Deus, eu acredito em milagre, ele pode acontecer, e quero fazer parte dele. Mas para que esse milagre aconteça, nós precisamos levar em conta que teve dois grupos trabalhando os documentos aqui, que nós não podemos esquecer. Portanto, o documento é muito importante, dos grupos aqui. Segundo, que a gente possa fazer um documento político para servir de base de guarda-chuva, também é possível fazer, se a gente entender três coisas: primeiro, Quioto, Convenção-Quadro, MRV, não podem adentrar a soberania dos países - cada país tem que ter a competência de se autofiscalizar - e, ao mesmo tempo, que o dinheiro seja colocado para os países efetivamente mais pobres. O Brasil não veio barganhar. As nossas metas não precisam de dinheiro externo. Nós iremos fazer com os nossos recursos, mas estamos dispostos a dar um passo a mais se a gente conseguir resolver o problema que vai atender, primeiro, a manutenção do desenvolvimento dos países em desenvolvimento. Nós passamos um século sem crescer, enquanto outros cresciam muito. Agora que nós começamos a crescer, não é justo que voltemos a fazer sacrifício. No Brasil ainda tem muitos pobres. No Brasil tem muitos pobres. Na África tem muitos pobres. Na Índia e na China tem muitos pobres. E nós também compreendemos o papel dos países mais ricos. Eles, também, não podem ser aqueles que vão nos salvar. O que nós queremos é apenas, conjuntamente, ricos e pobres, estabelecermos um ponto comum que nos permita sair daqui, orgulhosamente, dizendo aos quatros cantos do mundo que nós estamos preocupados em preservar o futuro do planeta Terra sem o sacrifício da sua principal espécie, que são homens, mulheres e crianças que vivem neste mundo. Muito obrigado."

Mister President, Mister Secretary General, gentlemen and ladies heads of state, gentlemen and ladies heads of government, friends. I confess to all of you that I am a little frustrated. Because we have been arguing about the question of climate for a long time and each time we again confirm and agree that the problem is graver than we can imagine. Thinking to contribute to the discussion at this conference, Brazil has taken a daring position. We present our goals for 2020. We have undertaken a promise and approved it in the national Congress, making it into a law, that Brazil, by 2020, will reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses by between 36.1% and 38.9%, based on factors which we consider important: changes to the Brazilian agricultural system; changes to the Brazilian steel industry; changes and improvements to our energy grid, which is already one of the cleanest in the world; and we have undertaken the promise to reduce deforestation in the Amazon by 80% by 2020. And we did this by constructing an economic structure which will oblige a developing country, with many economic difficulties, to spend 166 billion $US by 2020, the equivalent of 16 billion $US per year. This is not an easy task, but it was necessary to take these measures to show to the world that with half-hearted words and bargaining we will not find a solution at this conference in Copenhagen. Last night I had the pleasure of participating, until two-thirty in the morning, in a meeting, which, to be truthful, I did not expect to attend, because it was a meeting where there were many Heads of State, the most prominent figures in the political world, and sincerely, to submit Heads of State to pointed discussions as we did before, it has been a long time since I attended such a meeting. Yesterday I was at the meeting and I was remembering my time as a union leader, when we would be negotiation with business owners. And why should we have had such difficulty? Because we did not take care to work beforehand with the responsibility necessary for such work. The question is not only about money. Some people think that just money will resolve the problem. It did not resolve it in the past, it will not resolve it in the present, and will resolve it even less in the future. Money is important and poor countries need money to continue developing, to preserve the environment, and to preserve their forests. That's true. But it is important that when we. the developing countries and the rich countries, think of money, that we do not think that we are doing a favour, that we do not think we are giving alms to the poor, because the money that will be put on the table is the payment for emission of greenhouse gasses during two centuries by those who had the privilege of industrializing first. It is not bargaining about who has money and who does not have money. It is a much more serious engagement. It is a pledge to know if it is true or not what the scientists are saying, that global warming is irreversible. And therefore, who has more resources and more possibilities must guarantee a contribution to protect the neediest. Everyone is in agreement that we need to guarantee no more than 2 degrees of warming by 2050. That far we are in agreement. Everyone is aware that we will only be able to build this agreement if countries take on, with grave responsibility, their goals. And even the goals, which should have been a simple thing, there are many of us wanting to bargain about goals. All of us could have offered a little more if we had acted with good will in the last stages of negotiation. All of us know what is needed, to support promised goals and to support financial pledges, in whatever document which may be approved here, we must support the principles adopted in the Kyoto Protocol and the principles adopted in the United Nations Framework Convention. Because it is true that we have common responsibilities, and it is true that they are differentiated. I never let myself forget that when I took power in 2003 my promise was to try to guarantee that every Brazilian man and woman would be able to have breakfast, lunch and supper. In the developed world this is a thing of the past. For Africa, for Latin America, and for many countries in Asia, it is still a thing of the future. And this is linked to the discussion we are having here, because we are not only arguing the question of climate. We are arguing about development and opportunites for all countries. I had conversations with important leaders and I came to the conclusion that it was possible to build a political base that would be able to explain to the world that we, presidents and first-ministers and specialists, are very responsible and the we are going to find a solution. I still believe this, because I am an excessively optimistic person. But we have to play this game without thinking of winning and losing. It is true that countries which give money have the right to demand transparency, have the right even to demand proofs of the politics that were financed. But it is true that we must be very careful with this intrusion on developing countries and on the poorest countries. The experience that we have in our countries, whether it be the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank, it is not recommended that this continue in the 21st century. What we need ... I am going to say something, in public, which I have not yet said in my country, have not said to my party and have not said to my Congress: if it were necessary to make yet another sacrifice, Brazil is inclined to give money as well to help other countries. We are inclined to participate in the financing if we place ourselves in accord with a final agreement, here at this meeting. Now what we are not in agreement with is that the most important figures of the planet Earth will sign some document just to say that we have signed a document. I would love to leave here having signed the most perfect document in the world. But if we have not been able to accomplish it until now - my dear colleague Rasmussen and my colleague Bab Ki-moon I just don't know - if we have not succeeded in creating this document until now, I don't know if some angel or some wise man will descend into this meeting room and will put into our heads the intelligence that we have been missing until this very hour. I do not know. I believe, as I believe in God, I believe in miracles, it could happen, and I want to be a part of it. But in order for this miracle to occur we need to take into account that there were two groups working on documents here, and we cannot forget. Therefore, the document is very important to the groups here. Also, we could make a political document to serve as the basis of an umbrella, it is also possible to do that, if we understand three things: first, Kyoto, the United Nations Framework Convention, MRV (Measurement, Reporting and Verification), we cannot intrude on the sovereignty of countries - each country has to have the capability of regulating itself - and, at the same time, that money will be provided to the poorest countries. Brazil did not come here to bargain. For our goals we don't need any external money. We will achieve them with our own resources, but we are inclined to go a step farther if we are able to resolve the problem that will be waiting, most importantly, maintaining development in developing countries. We passed a century without growing while others grew very much. Now that we are starting to grow it is not fair that we return to making sacrifices. There are still many poor people in Brazil. Brazil has many poor people. In Africa there are many poor people. In India and China there are many poor people. And we also understand the role of the richest countries. They cannot be what will save us. What we want is simply, that together, rich and poor, we establish a common point that will let us leave here, proudly, saying to the four corners of the world that we are concerned with preserving the future of the planet Earth without sacrificing its primary scecies, which are the men, women and children who live in this world. Thankyou very much."

and for those of you who may not like Handel that much, ladies and Gentlemen, The Rolling Stones: It's Only Rock And Roll (But I Like It), what the hell ... here's a few for ya' Stevie Ray Vaughan - Texas Flood, JJ Cale & Eric Clapton - After Midnight, and finally Bob Dylan - The Lone Pilgrim.

The same hand that led me through scenes most severe, has kindly assisted me home.