Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User:AmericanKido

2007-07-17T17:33:38Z

AmericanKido:

THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!'''

User:AmericanKido

2007-07-17T17:33:21Z

AmericanKido:

[[Image:Exploding_Planet.jpg]]''' THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!'''

.jpg‎

User:AmericanKido

2007-07-17T17:30:50Z

AmericanKido: /* AmericanKido */

'''THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!'''

User:AmericanKido

2007-07-17T17:30:14Z

AmericanKido: New page: == AmericanKido == '''THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!'''

== AmericanKido ==
'''THIS PAGE IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION!!!'''

Pensacola Christian College

2007-04-02T15:24:28Z

AmericanKido:

Pensacola Christian College is a Christian College located just off I-28 in Pensacola, Florida, and was founded in 1974. at that time the college only had 100 students in comparison to today’s 6000+ Students. [http://www.pcci.edu/ To view the website click here]

Pensacola Christian College

2007-04-02T15:23:48Z

AmericanKido:

Pensacola Christian College Is a Christian College located just off I-28 in Pensacola, Florida, and was founded in 1974. at that time the college only had 100 students in comparison to today’s 6000+ Students. [http://www.pcci.edu/ To view the website click here]

Pensacola Christian College

2007-04-02T15:22:21Z

AmericanKido:

Pensacola Christian College

2007-04-02T15:19:17Z

AmericanKido: New page: Pensacola Christian College Is a Christian College located just off I-28 in Pensacola, Florida, and was founded in 1974. at that time the college only had 100 students in comparison to tod...

Plugged-In

2007-03-31T23:04:39Z

AmericanKido: New page: Plugged In is a Focus on the Family publication designed to help equip parents, youth leaders, ministers and teens with the essential tools that will enable them to understand, navigate an...

Plugged In is a Focus on the Family publication designed to help equip parents, youth leaders, ministers and teens with the essential tools that will enable them to understand, navigate and impact the culture in which they live. Because Entertainment is a potent influence on our culture for both good and evil. Through their reviews and discussions of that entertainment, they hope to spark intellectual thought, family discussion, spiritual growth and a strong desire to follow the command of Colossians 2:8. "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ."

[http://www.pluggedinonline.com/ To view their website click here]

Global warming

2007-03-29T14:43:30Z

AmericanKido: /* Al Gore and politics */

{{semi-protect}}
The '''global warming controversy''' centers on the controversial theory that the earth's atmosphere is heating up at a dangerous rate, because of human activities such as [[greenhouse gas]] emissions from burning [[fossil fuels]] (see [[Anthropogenic global warming]]). Supporters usually feel that immediate (not to say drastic) action must be taken to reduce these omissions (see [[Kyoto Protocol]]).

The theory enjoys wide political support, but many climatologists and meteorologists disagree with it. The United Nations' climate panel ([[UNIPCC]]) has assessed the theory and found that there is a "scientific consensus" in favor of it. Scientists [[Richard Lindzen]] and John Christy, among others, deny that such a consensus exists.

Whether or not there is a scientific consensus on the matter, there is wide agreement among the American public that Global Warming is a reality. A poll conducted March 11-14 of 2007 found that the majority of the American public (59%) believes we are already seeing the effects of Global Warming, an additional 3% and 8% respectively believe they will see the effects with in a few years or within their lifetime, and 19% believe that Global Warming will be seen, not in their lifetime, but in future generations—only a small minority 8% believe that Global Warming will never happen. <ref>Poling report on Gallup poll for March 11-14, 2007[http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm]</ref>.

The name is inaccurate, and should be '''Global Climate Change''', as the increasing amount of heat stored in the atmosphere has had disruptive effects leading to colder weather in some areas.

== Scientific background ==

The theory of climate change concerns many varied factors, but one of the most commonly cited is that of 'the greenhouse effect.'

This is what occurs when high energy solar radiation loses energy upon entry to the Earth's atmosphere. It then is 'trapped' inside it, thus heating up the Earth, to the extent of approximately 25 degrees Fahrenheit. It cannot escape, however, as it has a lower frequency and thus cannot re-penetrate the atmosphere. This is essential for the survival on life on Earth, but proponents of the Climate Change theory argue that this system is being unbalanced by a human-caused (anthropogenic) increase in levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which trap more heat in, raising the overall temperature. They argue that this would have numerous adverse effects; it could cause polar ice to melt, thus raising sea levels, and could cause desertification to already vulnerable regions. <ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/evidence/greenhouse_effect_img.shtml</ref>

== History ==
The scientific theory is widely accepted within the scientific community<ref>http://www.ipcc.ch/</ref>. Conservatives who are opposed to the political proposals that flow from acceptance of the theory, are skeptical of the theorists, and challenge the scientific validity of portions of the theory.

:1) The theory that we are currently in a period of climate change consisting of increasing temperature, which, if it were to continue, would have important socio-economic consequences well within the next century.

:2) The theory that this change is caused by increasing CO2 gasses and a resulting "greenhouse" effect.

:3) The theory that this change is caused by human activity, mostly industrial emissions of carbon-based "greenhouse gasses."
Much of the discussion of climate change concerns

:4) The proposal that global warming can and should be reversed by taking large-scale international action to reduce greenhouse emissions.

Point #1 has become very widely accepted in the past few decades, even by conservatives who were once skeptical, but argue that the rising temperature is due to other factors. <ref>http://www.nationalcenter.org/WCT012304.html</ref> <ref>http://www.californiaconservative.org/liberals/global-warming-an-ardent-liberal-opens-up/</ref>
<ref>http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/5/91239/48194</ref>

Point #1 is argued against by those showing record cold temperatures around the globe. These record cold spells tend to be in isolated locations, and the arctic and antarctic, telling indicators of global temperature trends, are both heating, and fast. <ref>http://www.physorg.com/news2860.html</ref> <ref>http://www.erh.noaa.gov/box/productDisplay.php?product=BOSRERBOS</ref> <ref>http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/07/D8EBMGIO0.html</ref>

Points #2 and point #3 are more controversial, although widely accepted by many scientists. Point #3 is the one most attacked by global warming skeptics.

Point #4 is what the political and international debate are about. Both climate change itself, and the very large-scale actions that are proposed to combat it, would have enormous economic effects with identifiable winners and losers, resulting in an intense debate. For example, since the industrialized nations emit most of the CO2, if it were agreed that these emissions needed to be reduced sharply, the burden would fall much more heavily on these nations than on undeveloped nations. {{fact}}

== Al Gore and politics ==
Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of the full global warming theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.<ref>http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/kyotorpt.html</ref>

The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community because of the vast amount of conclusive evidence {{fact}}, though that is not to say there is unanimity.<ref>Myths of Global Warming[http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html]</ref><ref>No Evidence for Global Warming[http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed012298b.cfm]</ref> On February 2, 2007, an international panel of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments issued a report concluding:

The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>

Al Gore's film [http://imdb.com/title/tt0497116/usercomments?start=60 An Inconvenient Truth] (already available on DVD that was reviewed by experts {{fact}} and in [http://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Planetary-Emergency-Warming/dp/1594865671 book format]) has recently been challenged by an entertaining and informative documentary on Channel 4 in the UK entitled [http://www.video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=Global+Warming+Swindle The Great Global Warming Swindle].<ref> http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html</ref>. Despite the popularity of the Channel 4 documentary, experts claim it has flaws and scientists appearing in it complained that they have been misled<ref>http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papersonline/responseto_channel4.htm</ref>, and are is considering legal action against the documentary makers for misrepresenting him.

Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots.[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?_r=1&oref=slogin]

== The conservative view ==
Just as the pro-global warming scientists are benefiting from promoting global warming, the global warming skeptical scientists have had funding from energy companies. <ref>http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html</ref> It can be said that they profit from energy stock, just as well as the pro-global warming scientists. However, the skeptics are not selling carbon credits, but they are profiting from selling alternative energy products and services. {{fact}}

In the UK, Conservatives propose a bill that will tax flights to combat climate change.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6438685.stm</ref> Governor of California [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] signed the Global Warming Solutions Act to try and curb global warming.<ref>http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/4111/</ref> The Pentagon has told [[George W. Bush]] that global warming is a real threat.<ref>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html</ref> [[George W. Bush]] admits that global warming is a problem, but that there is still some debate about it.<ref>http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,1210402,00.html</ref>

== Evangelical view ==
In Febuary of 2006, eighty-six evangelical church leaders backed an initative to combat global warming.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/08/national/08warm.html</ref> This call to action acknowledges the growing body of evidence that global warming is happening and acknowledges the pledge in 2004 that humans have "a sacred responsibility to steward the Earth and not a license to abuse the [[creation]] of which we are a part." <ref>http://www.christiansandclimate.org/statement</ref> This stance is not held by all evangelical church leaders; some of whom claim that this is distracting from other social issues.
<ref>http://www.creationcare.org/files/global_warming_briefing.pdf</ref>

A sharp difference of opinion over which issues ought to top the political agenda of Christian conservatives spilled out into the open at a March 8th meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals. Rev. Richard Cizik has been outspoken on the global warming issue, saying in a recent documentary that "to harm this world by environmental degradation is an offense against God." Cizik warned that "if you put the politics first and make it primary, I believe that is a tragic and fateful choice." The NAE has issued a press release which continues to back Cizik. <ref>http://www.abpnews.com/1833.article</ref>

== Conflicting Opinions/Data ==

The global warming theory is a scientific theory, that has been supported by many peer-reviewed journal articles, published in highly respected international scientific journals.

== Global warming advocacy Websites ==

Many web sites, forms, blogs, and other web sites exist for educating the public about global warming. Here is a list of these web sites:
* [http://www.climatecrisis.net/ Climate Crisis] Educational website that offers information about An inconvenient truth.
* [http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/ Stop Global Warming] Sells books on stopping global warming, has a list of companies selling global warming items.
* [http://www.climateark.org/blog/ Climate Change Blog] Links to other global warming blogs.
* [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/topics/global+warming Huffington Post Global Warming Blog] Appears to promote news paper and advertising by promoting global warming.
* [http://www.updebate.org United Political Debate]
* [http://www.realclimate.org Real Climate] Scientific Blogs maintained by scientists in the field

== Global warming Skeptist ==

[http://www.climateaudit.org/ Climate Audit Website]

[http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=Global+Warming+Swindle Global Warming Swindle] Documentary Film

==References==
<references/>

Global warming

2007-03-29T14:38:57Z

AmericanKido: /* Global warming Skeptist Websites */

{{semi-protect}}
The '''global warming controversy''' centers on the controversial theory that the earth's atmosphere is heating up at a dangerous rate, because of human activities such as [[greenhouse gas]] emissions from burning [[fossil fuels]] (see [[Anthropogenic global warming]]). Supporters usually feel that immediate (not to say drastic) action must be taken to reduce these omissions (see [[Kyoto Protocol]]).

The theory enjoys wide political support, but many climatologists and meteorologists disagree with it. The United Nations' climate panel ([[UNIPCC]]) has assessed the theory and found that there is a "scientific consensus" in favor of it. Scientists [[Richard Lindzen]] and John Christy, among others, deny that such a consensus exists.

Whether or not there is a scientific consensus on the matter, there is wide agreement among the American public that Global Warming is a reality. A poll conducted March 11-14 of 2007 found that the majority of the American public (59%) believes we are already seeing the effects of Global Warming, an additional 3% and 8% respectively believe they will see the effects with in a few years or within their lifetime, and 19% believe that Global Warming will be seen, not in their lifetime, but in future generations—only a small minority 8% believe that Global Warming will never happen. <ref>Poling report on Gallup poll for March 11-14, 2007[http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm]</ref>.

The name is inaccurate, and should be '''Global Climate Change''', as the increasing amount of heat stored in the atmosphere has had disruptive effects leading to colder weather in some areas.

== Scientific background ==

The theory of climate change concerns many varied factors, but one of the most commonly cited is that of 'the greenhouse effect.'

This is what occurs when high energy solar radiation loses energy upon entry to the Earth's atmosphere. It then is 'trapped' inside it, thus heating up the Earth, to the extent of approximately 25 degrees Fahrenheit. It cannot escape, however, as it has a lower frequency and thus cannot re-penetrate the atmosphere. This is essential for the survival on life on Earth, but proponents of the Climate Change theory argue that this system is being unbalanced by a human-caused (anthropogenic) increase in levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which trap more heat in, raising the overall temperature. They argue that this would have numerous adverse effects; it could cause polar ice to melt, thus raising sea levels, and could cause desertification to already vulnerable regions. <ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/climate/evidence/greenhouse_effect_img.shtml</ref>

== History ==
The scientific theory is widely accepted within the scientific community<ref>http://www.ipcc.ch/</ref>. Conservatives who are opposed to the political proposals that flow from acceptance of the theory, are skeptical of the theorists, and challenge the scientific validity of portions of the theory.

:1) The theory that we are currently in a period of climate change consisting of increasing temperature, which, if it were to continue, would have important socio-economic consequences well within the next century.

:2) The theory that this change is caused by increasing CO2 gasses and a resulting "greenhouse" effect.

:3) The theory that this change is caused by human activity, mostly industrial emissions of carbon-based "greenhouse gasses."
Much of the discussion of climate change concerns

:4) The proposal that global warming can and should be reversed by taking large-scale international action to reduce greenhouse emissions.

Point #1 has become very widely accepted in the past few decades, even by conservatives who were once skeptical, but argue that the rising temperature is due to other factors. <ref>http://www.nationalcenter.org/WCT012304.html</ref> <ref>http://www.californiaconservative.org/liberals/global-warming-an-ardent-liberal-opens-up/</ref>
<ref>http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/5/91239/48194</ref>

Point #1 is argued against by those showing record cold temperatures around the globe. These record cold spells tend to be in isolated locations, and the arctic and antarctic, telling indicators of global temperature trends, are both heating, and fast. <ref>http://www.physorg.com/news2860.html</ref> <ref>http://www.erh.noaa.gov/box/productDisplay.php?product=BOSRERBOS</ref> <ref>http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/07/D8EBMGIO0.html</ref>

Points #2 and point #3 are more controversial, although widely accepted by many scientists. Point #3 is the one most attacked by global warming skeptics.

Point #4 is what the political and international debate are about. Both climate change itself, and the very large-scale actions that are proposed to combat it, would have enormous economic effects with identifiable winners and losers, resulting in an intense debate. For example, since the industrialized nations emit most of the CO2, if it were agreed that these emissions needed to be reduced sharply, the burden would fall much more heavily on these nations than on undeveloped nations. {{fact}}

== Al Gore and politics ==
Al Gore, Vice President under President Clinton from 1992 to 2000, is a high profile advocate of the full global warming theory. Promoters of this theory, including many prominent scientists, call for international treaties, like one proposed in Kyoto, Japan, to limit carbon emissions using a combination of conservation and technological innovation.<ref>http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/kyotorpt.html</ref>

The theory is widely accepted within the scientific community because of the vast amount of conclusive evidence {{fact}}, though that is not to say there is unanimity.<ref>Myths of Global Warming[http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html]</ref><ref>No Evidence for Global Warming[http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed012298b.cfm]</ref> On February 2, 2007, an international panel of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments issued a report concluding:

The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>

Al Gore's film [http://imdb.com/title/tt0497116/usercomments?start=60 An Inconvenient Truth] (already available on DVD that was reviewed by experts {{fact}} and in [http://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Planetary-Emergency-Warming/dp/1594865671 book format]) has recently been challenged by an entertaining and informative documentary on Channel 4 in the UK entitled "The Great Global Warming Swindle".<ref> http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html</ref>. Despite the popularity of the Channel 4 documentary, experts claim it has flaws and scientists appearing in it complained that they have been misled<ref>http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papersonline/responseto_channel4.htm</ref>, and are is considering legal action against the documentary makers for misrepresenting him.

Criticisms of Mr. Gore have come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists like Dr. Easterbook, who told his peers that he had no political ax to grind. A few see natural variation as more central to global warming than heat-trapping gases. Many appear to occupy a middle ground in the climate debate, seeing human activity as a serious threat but challenging what they call the extremism of both skeptics and zealots.[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/science/13gore.html?_r=1&oref=slogin]

== The conservative view ==
Just as the pro-global warming scientists are benefiting from promoting global warming, the global warming skeptical scientists have had funding from energy companies. <ref>http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html</ref> It can be said that they profit from energy stock, just as well as the pro-global warming scientists. However, the skeptics are not selling carbon credits, but they are profiting from selling alternative energy products and services. {{fact}}

In the UK, Conservatives propose a bill that will tax flights to combat climate change.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6438685.stm</ref> Governor of California [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] signed the Global Warming Solutions Act to try and curb global warming.<ref>http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-release/4111/</ref> The Pentagon has told [[George W. Bush]] that global warming is a real threat.<ref>http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html</ref> [[George W. Bush]] admits that global warming is a problem, but that there is still some debate about it.<ref>http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,1210402,00.html</ref>

== Evangelical view ==
In Febuary of 2006, eighty-six evangelical church leaders backed an initative to combat global warming.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/08/national/08warm.html</ref> This call to action acknowledges the growing body of evidence that global warming is happening and acknowledges the pledge in 2004 that humans have "a sacred responsibility to steward the Earth and not a license to abuse the [[creation]] of which we are a part." <ref>http://www.christiansandclimate.org/statement</ref> This stance is not held by all evangelical church leaders; some of whom claim that this is distracting from other social issues.
<ref>http://www.creationcare.org/files/global_warming_briefing.pdf</ref>

A sharp difference of opinion over which issues ought to top the political agenda of Christian conservatives spilled out into the open at a March 8th meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals. Rev. Richard Cizik has been outspoken on the global warming issue, saying in a recent documentary that "to harm this world by environmental degradation is an offense against God." Cizik warned that "if you put the politics first and make it primary, I believe that is a tragic and fateful choice." The NAE has issued a press release which continues to back Cizik. <ref>http://www.abpnews.com/1833.article</ref>

== Conflicting Opinions/Data ==

The global warming theory is a scientific theory, that has been supported by many peer-reviewed journal articles, published in highly respected international scientific journals.

== Global warming advocacy Websites ==

Many web sites, forms, blogs, and other web sites exist for educating the public about global warming. Here is a list of these web sites:
* [http://www.climatecrisis.net/ Climate Crisis] Educational website that offers information about An inconvenient truth.
* [http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/ Stop Global Warming] Sells books on stopping global warming, has a list of companies selling global warming items.
* [http://www.climateark.org/blog/ Climate Change Blog] Links to other global warming blogs.
* [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/topics/global+warming Huffington Post Global Warming Blog] Appears to promote news paper and advertising by promoting global warming.
* [http://www.updebate.org United Political Debate]
* [http://www.realclimate.org Real Climate] Scientific Blogs maintained by scientists in the field

== Global warming Skeptist ==

[http://www.climateaudit.org/ Climate Audit Website]

[http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=Global+Warming+Swindle Global Warming Swindle] Documentary Film

==References==
<references/>

Tipper Gore

2007-03-29T14:29:09Z

AmericanKido:

Tipper Gore is the wife of Former Vice-president and Presidential canidate [http://www.conservapedia.com/Al_Gore Al Gore]

Tipper Gore

2007-03-29T14:28:05Z

AmericanKido: New page: Tipper Gore is the wife of Former Vice-president and Presidential canidate[http://www.conservapedia.com/Al_Gore Al Gore]

Tipper Gore is the wife of Former Vice-president and Presidential canidate[http://www.conservapedia.com/Al_Gore Al Gore]

Spendic Lake

2007-03-29T14:11:37Z

AmericanKido: New page: Did You Mean [http://www.conservapedia.com/Spednic_Lake Spednic Lake?]

Did You Mean [http://www.conservapedia.com/Spednic_Lake Spednic Lake?]

Spednic Lake

2007-03-29T14:02:18Z

AmericanKido: /* Summary */

== Summary ==

Spednic Lake is located north of Vanceboro, Maine.
Land Elevation ranges from 120 - 180m. The surrounding are contains lakes and islands surrounded by poorly drained rocky soil. This geological feature supports a rich diversity of trees and plants, including tolerant and intolerant hardwood, and a good mix of softwoods (white pine, cedar, and old growth hemlock). The Canadian side of the lake is part of the St. Croix Canadian Heritage River.
Spednic Lake is one of the largest lakes in Maine and one of only four lakes over 15,000 acres in the state that remain largely undeveloped. The absence of development to date has supported one of Maine's last remaining native landlocked salmon fisheries and some of the best smallmouth bass habitat in the United States. Its many islands, fjord-like coves and rising, forested shores offer a stunning setting for fishermen, canoeists and naturalists who ply its sparkling waters to a silence broken only by the lap of waves and the call of the loon. Native landlocked salmon, smallmouth bass and other prized fish draw many repeat visitors to local sporting camps that take pride in their outdoor heritage, including the guides' continued use of traditional, handcrafted Grand Lake canoes. More than 32 million people live within a day's drive of its shores and each year visitors from across North America and abroad travel its waters. Careful management and the form of protection offered by this project will ensure that this semi-remote wilderness area will remain undeveloped and unspoiled forever.
The upper St. Croix River is one of the most undeveloped major river corridors in the northeastern United States, offering some of the region's premiere backcountry canoeing waters. Paddled by nearly 5,000 people each year, the St. Croix's winding course and near-wilderness setting keep the river uncongested and parties well-separated. It is a favorite of families, outdoor camps and others who wish to combine paddling, wildlife viewing and, for many, overnight camping. The most popular trip is the 20-mile section from Vanceboro to Loon Bay. With its mix of slow and fast water (class I-II) is ideally suited for canoeists of all skill levels.
Spednic Lake and the upper St. Croix give haven to a unique concentration of fragile and valued natural resources, including rare flora and fauna, old growth tree stands and an array of migratory birds. The waterway is prime breeding ground for the state's bald eagle population and a recovering run of atlantic salmon. Moose, deer, black bear, otter, beaver, loons, herons and waterfowl all share its shores and waters. Rare and uncommon plants grow in niche habitats along the banks. Special protection is given to some of these by an ecological reserve on 11 river islands and a newly created 100 square mile Protected Area on the New Brunswick side of the lake
Archeological sites bear witness to over 3,000 years of human history along Spednic Lake and the St. Croix River. Traditional portage routes and campsites are still in use today. The St. Croix's productive forests, rich fisheries and water highway sustained early native people and supported later settlers who built the communities and resource-based economy that remain the area's mainstay.

Spednic Lake

2007-03-29T13:58:49Z

AmericanKido: /* Summary */

== Summary ==

Spednic Lake is located north of Vanceboro, Maine.
Land Elevation ranges from 120 - 180m. The surrounding are contains lakes and islands surrounded by poorly drained rocky soil. This geological feature supports a rich diversity of trees and plants, including tolerant and intolerant hardwood, and a good mix of softwoods (white pine, cedar, and old growth hemlock). The Canadian side of the lake is part of the St. Croix Canadian Heritage River.
Spednic Lake is one of the largest lakes in Maine and one of only four lakes over 15,000 acres in the state that remain largely undeveloped. The absence of development to date has supported one of Maine's last remaining native landlocked salmon fisheries and some of the best smallmouth bass habitat in the United States. Its many islands, fjord-like coves and rising, forested shores offer a stunning setting for fishermen, canoeists and naturalists who ply its sparkling waters to a silence broken only by the lap of waves and the call of the loon. Native landlocked salmon, smallmouth bass and other prized fish draw many repeat visitors to local sporting camps that take pride in their outdoor heritage, including the guides' continued use of traditional, handcrafted Grand Lake canoes. More than 32 million people live within a day's drive of its shores and each year visitors from across North America and abroad travel its waters. Careful management and the form of protection offered by this project will ensure that this semi-remote wilderness area will remain undeveloped and unspoiled forever.
The upper St. Croix River is one of the most undeveloped major river corridors in the northeastern United States, offering some of the region's premiere backcountry canoeing waters. Paddled by nearly 5,000 people each year, the St. Croix's winding course and near-wilderness setting keep the river uncongested and parties well-separated. It is a favorite of families, outdoor camps and others who wish to combine paddling, wildlife viewing and, for many, overnight camping. The most popular trip is the 20-mile section from Vanceboro to Loon Bay. With its mix of slow and fast water (class I-II) is ideally suited for canoeists of all skill levels.
Spednic Lake and the upper St. Croix give haven to a unique concentration of fragile and valued natural resources, including rare flora and fauna, old growth tree stands and an array of migratory birds. The waterway is prime breeding ground for the state's bald eagle population and a recovering run of atlantic salmon. Moose, deer, black bear, otter, beaver, loons, herons, waterfowl and a unique dragonfly all share its shores and waters. Rare and uncommon plants grow in niche habitats along the banks. Special protection is given to some of these by an ecological reserve on 11 river islands and a newly created 100 square mile Protected Area on the New Brunswick side of the lake
Archeological sites bear witness to over 3,000 years of human history along Spednic Lake and the St. Croix River. Traditional portage routes and campsites are still in use today. The St. Croix's productive forests, rich fisheries and water highway sustained early native people and supported later settlers who built the communities and resource-based economy that remain the area's mainstay.

Spednic Lake

2007-03-29T13:56:59Z

AmericanKido: New page: == Summary == Spednic Lake is located north of Vanceboro, ME. Land Elevation ranges from 120 - 180m. The surrounding are contains lakes and islands surrounded by poorly drained rocky soi...

== Summary ==

Spednic Lake is located north of Vanceboro, ME.
Land Elevation ranges from 120 - 180m. The surrounding are contains lakes and islands surrounded by poorly drained rocky soil. This geological feature supports a rich diversity of trees and plants, including tolerant and intolerant hardwood, and a good mix of softwoods (white pine, cedar, and old growth hemlock). The Canadian side of the lake is part of the St. Croix Canadian Heritage River.
Spednic Lake is one of the largest lakes in Maine and one of only four lakes over 15,000 acres in the state that remain largely undeveloped. The absence of development to date has supported one of Maine's last remaining native landlocked salmon fisheries and some of the best smallmouth bass habitat in the United States. Its many islands, fjord-like coves and rising, forested shores offer a stunning setting for fishermen, canoeists and naturalists who ply its sparkling waters to a silence broken only by the lap of waves and the call of the loon. Native landlocked salmon, smallmouth bass and other prized fish draw many repeat visitors to local sporting camps that take pride in their outdoor heritage, including the guides' continued use of traditional, handcrafted Grand Lake canoes. More than 32 million people live within a day's drive of its shores and each year visitors from across North America and abroad travel its waters. Careful management and the form of protection offered by this project will ensure that this semi-remote wilderness area will remain undeveloped and unspoiled forever.
The upper St. Croix River is one of the most undeveloped major river corridors in the northeastern United States, offering some of the region's premiere backcountry canoeing waters. Paddled by nearly 5,000 people each year, the St. Croix's winding course and near-wilderness setting keep the river uncongested and parties well-separated. It is a favorite of families, outdoor camps and others who wish to combine paddling, wildlife viewing and, for many, overnight camping. The most popular trip is the 20-mile section from Vanceboro to Loon Bay. With its mix of slow and fast water (class I-II) is ideally suited for canoeists of all skill levels.
Spednic Lake and the upper St. Croix give haven to a unique concentration of fragile and valued natural resources, including rare flora and fauna, old growth tree stands and an array of migratory birds. The waterway is prime breeding ground for the state's bald eagle population and a recovering run of atlantic salmon. Moose, deer, black bear, otter, beaver, loons, herons, waterfowl and a unique dragonfly all share its shores and waters. Rare and uncommon plants grow in niche habitats along the banks. Special protection is given to some of these by an ecological reserve on 11 river islands and a newly created 100 square mile Protected Area on the New Brunswick side of the lake
Archeological sites bear witness to over 3,000 years of human history along Spednic Lake and the St. Croix River. Traditional portage routes and campsites are still in use today. The St. Croix's productive forests, rich fisheries and water highway sustained early native people and supported later settlers who built the communities and resource-based economy that remain the area's mainstay.

Debate:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?

2007-03-23T12:35:07Z

AmericanKido: /* '''No ...''' */

=='''The problem is that "Democracy" means two things'''==

...and we often get the two confused. The "Democracy" that tugs at people's heartstrings -- the one worth fighting for, the one that is associated with liberty and rights -- is the ''philosophy'' of Democracy. This is a government "of the people, by the people, for the people." There is also a government ''type'' which is called Democracy (hereafter called Democratic Government), which is a government where people vote for things. This type of government is not all that worth getting excited about ''unless'' it is built on a foundation of the philosophy of Democracy. We can't give someone a government that is built on that philosophy, because by nature democracy must be "of the people". So, if America gives any other country a government, no matter how much it looks like a Democratic Government, it will never truly be a democracy. And a dictatorship, if put in place by the people, consisting of the people, and working for the people, will be more of a true democracy than anything we can give them. Granted, Saddam's leadership was certainly not "for the people", but our leadership there is not "of the people", so they are equally not democracy. So the answer is "yes, we can give them a Democratic Government, but no, we can't give them Democracy."

I disagree. In small communities the "Democracy" that tugs at people is possible because the group is small and everyone's say can be heard. As communities grow large, this has generally become impossible. The founders of the US of A (as I understand it), based America's government on the Greek forum, where everyone was heard by the attending community. Whether fortunate or unfortunate, when a group grows large is becomes efficient for sections of the large group to elect or appoint a spokesperson to represent the section in the public forum. In the US of A, this sectionizing is done mainly by geography. Each state (a stand alone member of the US of A) is represented by 2 Senators. And in the other House of Congress, representation is done by population, again with a geographical distribution (mostly). Can these, or some part of these, ideas work anywhere? Well, yes BUT the underlying assumptions need to be agreed to by those who engage in the forum. The idea that everyone should have an equal say is not present in Iraq. In fact, it is strongly objected to by persons who wield weapons to make themselves heard and to quell other voices. The second assumption that worked in the US of A was elected representation. This assumption is also against Iraq traditions. There, the interests of a group have traditionally been a matter of blood or other means of selection rather than by vote. A brief answer to "Is democracy possible in Iraq" could be stated, "yes, but it will need many indidivudals to tolerate new ideas traditionally unsupported." [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 02:49, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

=='''Post Your Thoughts'''==

Read the entry on [[Turkey]].

==='''Yes ...'''===

It depends how you do you interpret democracy. If democracy means walking around naked, not being interested in where your daughter, sister or mom is sleeping tonight, being able to deny the presence of God, drinking alcohol all night and then staggering like an ill-minded animal on the streets, not respecting your parents by putting them in retirement houses when they become old, kicking your children out of your houses when they become 18, not knowing your neighbors after living thirty years door to door with them, having disposable marriages, watching two men kissing each other on the street ''and'' yet claim to be socialized and free then the answer is ''no''.

But if democracy means having free right of speech in the ways that God permits (by not doing all of above and some others), being able to question the ruling authority, women's right of voting, equality of women and men in terms of religious moral ethical social conjugal and political rights, respecting each others' lives and possessions, and many many more righteous aspects which have already been explained in the Holy Quran, then the answer is ''yes''.

And if you want to know more about democracy please do read the history of first fifty years of Islam where the complete democracy was introduced to the mankind for the first time.

It is not a matter of me being right or you being wrong, it is a matter between you and your God so contemplate before you leave.

-I think that there are already democracies in The Middle East, but I think some people question that because they see a democracy more as upholding American values, but the Arabs don't seem to want that

==='''We're not even democratic.'''===

Quite honestly, our system of government is only very loosely democratic (in that we "vote", but that's it -- more of a Republic), and the structure of our government was based largely on a series of events. As well, there are forms of democracy in the Mid-East, such as Iran which does in fact hold elections (yes, they do). However, the largest problem dealing with countries such as Iraq is that the people are more or less split into a few prominent groups, with a minority of them actually causing the problems. But bleh, I don't want to go into specifics of Middle Eastern politics right now, so yes and no. Yes, a form can exist (under the correct circumstance -- which is why Iraq is a cesspool of a civil war right now -- because of a lack of acknowledgment to the reality of the situation), but not actual democracy.
: Rather than represent our own interests, we elect a person who, we hope, will represent our interests for us. Such people are (generally) experienced in the area. Iran would be a democracy except that it has a sort of monarchy of religious overseers who (apparently) can override any portion of the democractic process. For example the religious overseers decared a number of candiates who were going to be voted on by the populace as "unqualified". [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 02:55, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

==='''No ...'''===

Democracy is likened unto a wolf, a fox and a sheep voting on what they will have for supper. The sheep will quickly lose.
Democracy is likened unto a man and his dog out in the woods. The man gets real hungry. So he cuts off the dog's tail and cooks it and gives the bone to the dog.
The forefathers knew about a democracy. That is why they created a republic.

'''Comment:''' I am sorry, but I don't understand what you mean. The United States is a ''democratic'' republic. Are you saying that democracy alone is a bad form of government? If you are then I would have to agree with you ... to an extent. After a while, democracy alone begins to falter, as seen in ancient Athens. But building a republic on the foundation of a democracy is a very strong government. If you could please tell me if this was what you were getting at, it would be greatly appreciated. [[User:David R|David R]]
:'''Reply''' The United States is not a democracy, and "democratic republic" is not the right term either. The U.S. is a republic, a republic is called a "democratic" form of government, but it is not a democracy, and not very similar to a democracy. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 15:51, 4 February 2007 (EST)
In democracy the people ''are'' the government, they propose and vote on the laws, and there is no elected legislature. A republic is different. A republic is better then a democracy because it recognizes the fact that the people in general do not know enough to govern properly. In a Republic the people choose representatives who are (hopefully) better informed and know enough to do the job. A republic takes the strong points of democracy (no tyrants, self government ...) without some of the problems (uninformed government, rule by popular opinion) and creates a better form of government. That said, this debate was meant to apply to all kinds of self government, and was misnamed, it should say: "Is it even possible to install self government in a Muslim country." --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 15:47, 4 February 2007 (EST)

'''Comment'''
:There is a phrase which has grown so common in the world's mouth that it has come to seem to have sense and meaning—the sense and meaning implied when it is used; that is the phrase which refers to this or that or the other nation as possibly being "capable of self-government"; and the implied sense of it is, that there has been a nation somewhere, some time or other which ''wasn't'' capable of it—wasn't as able to govern itself as some self-appointed specialists were or would be to govern it. The master-minds of all nations, in all ages, have sprung in affluent multitude from the mass of the nation, and from the mass of the nation only—not from its privileged classes; and so, no matter what the nation's intellectual grade was; whether high or low, the bulk of its ability was in the long ranks of its nameless and its poor, and so it never saw the day that it had not the material in abundance whereby to govern itself. Which is to assert an always self-proven fact: that even the best governed and most free and most enlightened monarchy is still behind the best condition attainable by its people; and that the same is true of kindred governments of lower grades, all the way down to the lowest.

::—Mark Twain, ''A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court.'' [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:45, 4 February 2007 (EST)

Er, I rather suspect it would be better for everyone if, rather than "installing" democracy, one attempted to ''instill'' it. Just a thought.

:Some nations are born democracies, some achieve democracy, and some have democracy thrust upon them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:00, 8 March 2007 (EST)

For the sake of argument here, let's presume that "republic with democratic elections" is the meaning of democracy in the question. Anything else is a bit nitpicky, that's obviously what's intended in context. This being said, however, something else makes the question rather hard to answer. Turkey has a large Muslim population, and is a republic. Iran is as well, but is most certainly not. Egypt? Syria? Just what country are we talking about here? Those aren't any more similar than the US and the Netherlands, despite the fact that both are predominantly Christian.

So, this being said, it is more than "possible" for a democracy to exist in a Muslim country, it is a fact of life in Turkey. (And perhaps more, but certainly that one offhand.) If we are speaking of ''Iraq'', on the other hand (and whoever wrote the question most certainly thinking of it) ...

Unfortunately, to that one, no. Iraq has been botched terribly, and at this point is likely unsalvageable. There's going to be a long civil war there. I hope very much that I am wrong, but I don't see it ending any other way. I really don't know if it could've ever been salvaged, but at this point I don't think it's possible. [[User:Thatguy|Thatguy]] 00:18, 9 March 2007 (EST)

==='''You can install a muffler or battery but not a Democracy'''===
'''Comment'''
:Democracy is one of those words that is mostly misused and misunderstood .
Lets look at the definition:
“Demos: mean common people
“kratos”: means rule
so democracy means “ruled by people”
There probably are few purer examples of democracy than a lynch mob,
As a matter of fact though most Islamic countries are fascist they are better examples of pure democracies than the U.S..

Now let me try to explain that. If the vast majority of a population desire their government to impose sharia law and they believe that infidels should be killed or converted there is nothing undemocratic about that, though the infidel might disagree.

The U.S. is not a democracy.
It is a hybrid “constitutional representative federal republic”
This is far from a pure democracy. The U.S. is governed by a constitution of laws not of people.
Early in the history of the U.S. it’s founders agreed on a set of rules that would limit not only the power and discretion of the government ( it’s self and it’s law) but also it’s people and it’s subsequent elected leaders. Why did they do this? Well they knew that absolute power is corrupting and oppressive in any one entities hands. So, they basically spread it out .
Constitutional ( we are ruled by law )
Federation (we are made up of smaller sovereign countries or “states” )
Republic ( we are ruled by consent )
Representative ( we vote for our leaders )

: Good gosh. We govern ourselves because we create the laws we live under and we remove the laws we don't like. The Constitituion is a framework (and again, we could and have modified it) the laws fit within. We are not the effect of what has gone before, but use it as a guideline toward changes that will be to our benefit. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 03:00, 21 March 2007 (EDT)

==Yes==
Yes, Indonesia is the the world's third largest democracy, and the world's largest Muslim country. There you go.
--[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 18:15, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:We're talking extremist, e.g. Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they have a strong foothold and will not abandon it without Jihad. --[[User:Hojimachong|Hojimachong]] 18:19, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::So, should the original question read "Is it possible to install a democracy in a country that's run by radical mideastern fundamentalist Muslims?". Perhaps the question should have been more precise. And what do you mean by "not abandon it without Jihad"? Indonesians aren't exactly fickle, and I don't think they'd abandon their power anytime soon without some sort of struggle (literal definition of jihad). Oh, and Lebanon and Yemen are middle-eastern Muslim republican democracies.--[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 18:42, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::I guess I should be more precise in my answer too. Installing democracy strikes me as fundamentally naive. The very nature of democracy is supposed to be power derived from the people. Coming in and artificially imposing a democracy strikes me as nearly impossible, especially in such a foreign environment. Yes, democracy is possible in a predominantly Islamic country, no, "installing" it probably is an incredibly naive idea. Bush, bleh.--[[User:WOVcenter|WOVcenter]] 18:54, 8 March 2007 (EST)

==='''No ...'''===

Its not possible to "install" democracy. It is something that must evolve of the people. The question that needs to be asked is is it even right for us to try to install our system on anyone else? Why are we so assured that the way we do things is the only way that they can be done that will work. We came to our democratic system through our own will and process. No other country or people are going to replicate that process so why should they replicate the result? [[User:Little Suspicious|Little Suspicious]]

==='''No ...'''===

You Said That "We came to our democratic system through our own will and process." However that is not true, Thomas Jefferson once said "I would not want any man to judge me, unless he believed that someday god would judge him" The founding of this nation was based on christain principles. Our "democracy" was a system spoken of in the book of jeremiah: "The lord is our lawgiver, the lord is our judge and the lord is our king" The reason why democracy is not working in Iraq is because they are trying to create a government under muslim principles, contrary to the very foundation upon wich america was formed, the word of god. Freedom only works if you have responsibility. the only way that "democracy" will work, in any country is if the people in that country turn their hearts to god, the creator.

Debate:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?

2007-03-23T12:33:52Z

AmericanKido:

Smokey Bear

2007-03-21T23:26:35Z

AmericanKido:

Created in 1944, the Smokey Bear campaign is the longest running public service campaign in US History. Smokey's forest fire prevention message remained unchanged for 50 years until April 2001, when the Ad Council updated his message to address the increasing number of wildfires in the nation's woodlands. As one of the world's most recognizable fictional characters, Smokey's image is protected by US Federal Law and is administered by the USDA Forest Service, the National Association of State Foresters and the Ad Council.

But Did you know the cartoon Smokey Bear is based upon an actual baby black bear that was found alone, charred, and scared after a devastating wildfire burned through New Mexico?

One spring day in 1950 in the Capitan Mountains of New Mexico, an operator in one of the fire towers to the north of the Capitans spotted smoke and called the location into the nearest ranger station. The first crew discovered a major fire being swept along the ground between the trees, driven by a strong wind. Word spread rapidly and more crews reported to help. Forest Rangers, army soldiers, men from the New Mexico State Game Department, and civilian volunteers worked together to gain control of the raging fire. As soon as they contained the fire to one spot, the wind would push it across the lines. During one of the lulls in firefighting, a report of a lonely bear cub who had been seen wandering near the fireline was reported. The men left him alone because they thought the mother bear might come for him.

Several soldiers were caught directly in the path of the fire storm, barely escaping by laying face down on a rockslide for over an hour until the fire had burned past them. In spite of the experience, the firefighters were safe except for a few scorches and some burned holes in their clothes.
Nearby, the little cub had been caught in the path of the same fire and had not fared as well. He had taken refuge in a tree that was now nothing but a charred smoking snag. His climb had saved his life but left him badly burned on the paws and hind legs. The soldiers removed the little bear cub from the burned tree, but they did not know what to do with him. A rancher, who had been helping the firefighters, agreed to take the cub home. A New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Ranger heard about the cub when he returned to the fire camp and drove to the rancher's home to get the bear. The cub needed veterinary aid and was flown in a small plane to Santa Fe where the burns were treated and bandaged.

The news about the little bear spread swiftly throughout New Mexico. Soon the United Press and Associated Press picked up the story and broadcast it nationwide. Many people wrote or called to inquire about the little bear's progress. The State Game Warden wrote an official letter to the Chief of the Forest Service, presenting the cub to the agency with the understanding that the small bear would be dedicated to a publicity program of fire prevention and conservation. The go-ahead was given to send the bear to Washington, DC, where he found a home at the National Zoo, becoming the living symbol of Smokey Bear.

[http://www.smokey.com To view Smokey Bear's website click here]

Smokey Bear

2007-03-21T23:26:13Z

AmericanKido: New page: Created in 1944, the Smokey Bear campaign is the longest running public service campaign in US History. Smokey's forest fire prevention message remained unchanged for 50 years until April ...

Created in 1944, the Smokey Bear campaign is the longest running public service campaign in US History. Smokey's forest fire prevention message remained unchanged for 50 years until April 2001, when the Ad Council updated his message to address the increasing number of wildfires in the nation's woodlands. As one of the world's most recognizable fictional characters, Smokey's image is protected by US Federal Law and is administered by the USDA Forest Service, the National Association of State Foresters and the Ad Council.

But Did you know the cartoon Smokey Bear is based upon an actual baby black bear that was found alone, charred, and scared after a devastating wildfire burned through New Mexico?

One spring day in 1950 in the Capitan Mountains of New Mexico, an operator in one of the fire towers to the north of the Capitans spotted smoke and called the location into the nearest ranger station. The first crew discovered a major fire being swept along the ground between the trees, driven by a strong wind. Word spread rapidly and more crews reported to help. Forest Rangers, army soldiers, men from the New Mexico State Game Department, and civilian volunteers worked together to gain control of the raging fire. As soon as they contained the fire to one spot, the wind would push it across the lines. During one of the lulls in firefighting, a report of a lonely bear cub who had been seen wandering near the fireline was reported. The men left him alone because they thought the mother bear might come for him.

Several soldiers were caught directly in the path of the fire storm, barely escaping by laying face down on a rockslide for over an hour until the fire had burned past them. In spite of the experience, the firefighters were safe except for a few scorches and some burned holes in their clothes.
Nearby, the little cub had been caught in the path of the same fire and had not fared as well. He had taken refuge in a tree that was now nothing but a charred smoking snag. His climb had saved his life but left him badly burned on the paws and hind legs. The soldiers removed the little bear cub from the burned tree, but they did not know what to do with him. A rancher, who had been helping the firefighters, agreed to take the cub home. A New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Ranger heard about the cub when he returned to the fire camp and drove to the rancher's home to get the bear. The cub needed veterinary aid and was flown in a small plane to Santa Fe where the burns were treated and bandaged.

The news about the little bear spread swiftly throughout New Mexico. Soon the United Press and Associated Press picked up the story and broadcast it nationwide. Many people wrote or called to inquire about the little bear's progress. The State Game Warden wrote an official letter to the Chief of the Forest Service, presenting the cub to the agency with the understanding that the small bear would be dedicated to a publicity program of fire prevention and conservation. The go-ahead was given to send the bear to Washington, DC, where he found a home at the National Zoo, becoming the living symbol of Smokey Bear.

'''Links'''
[http://www.smokey.com To view Smokey Bear's website click here]

Don Currin

2007-03-21T00:21:52Z

AmericanKido: New page: Don Currin is a full-time itinerant evangelist. His pulpit ministry is directed to preaching to the inner life of the believer and the spiritual need of the lost. Don was born in Pensacol...

Don Currin is a full-time itinerant evangelist. His pulpit ministry is directed to preaching to the inner life of the believer and the spiritual need of the lost.

Don was born in Pensacola, Florida, on March 24, 1954 and at the age of seven moved to the Carolinas where he was reared and educated. Upon graduation in 1972 from Graham High School in Graham, North Carolina, he attended Gardner-Webb College to pursue educational interests.

In the Fall of 1974, Don continued his education after a year at home by transferring to Liberty Baptist College in Lynchburg, Virginia. On October 5, 1974, he received Christ as his personal Savior.

Acknowledging the call into evangelism in 1975, many oppor-tunities were provided for Don. These opportunities included serving as a director for the Liberty Baptist College Evangelistic Team and as an assistant to J.O. Grooms in the ministry of Treasure Path to Soul Winning.

After graduation from Liberty Baptist College in 1979, Don entered the ministry of evangelism. It was during this time that God led him into church planting, in which he was both a planter and a consultant. Don began the Fair Havens Baptist Church in Kinston, North Carolina in 1981.

The Lord has blessed Don with a wonderful helpmeet in Cindy and four children, Nathan, Aaron, Hannah, and Rachel. Don and his family are members of Calvary Baptist Church, Smyrna, Georgia where he currently serves as an elder.

Don has conducted over 700 local church meetings, retreats, and conferences accross North America. His ministry has taken him to the countries of Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Guyana, Russia, Mexico, Greece and Israel.

[http://www.doncurrinministries.org To see his website click here]

HENB

2007-03-20T23:51:17Z

AmericanKido: New page: '''About''' Home Educators of New Brunswick is a Christian organization formed to serve home schooling families and local support groups in New Brunswick, regardless of religious affilia...

'''About'''

Home Educators of New Brunswick is a Christian organization formed to serve home schooling families and local support groups in New Brunswick, regardless of religious affiliation. Home Educators of New Brunswick provides information, resources and encouragement to home schooling families across the province. Home Educators of New Brunswick provides an annual Home School conference where New Brunswick home schooling families can be inspired by home school leaders from New Brunswick and across North America. Since 2001, members of the Home Educators of New Brunswick board of directors have represented homeschoolers in New Brunswick at annual National Home School Leadership Conferences, which have been sponsored, by Home School Legal Defence of Canada and the Canadian Center for Home Education. At these conferences they have shared ideas and networked with home school leaders from across Canada and North America. Home Educators of New Brunswick closely guards and works to maintain favorable legislation regarding home schooling in their province. It is their vision that Home Educators of New Brunswick would provide a conduit whereby home schooling families can work together to ensure that the right to home school our children is never threatened. As an organization, Home Educators of New Brunswick works in close conjunction with Home School Legal Defense Association of Canada and are, therefore, able to quickly respond to issues that may arise within the provincial borders that effect the local home schooling family.

[http://www.henb.org To see the website click here]

Home Schooling in New Brunswick

2007-03-20T23:44:48Z