Montréal Expos Revival Taking Shape as The Cro Continues to Let 'Em Know

The Great Legend of Baseball Warren Cromartie and the president of the Chambre de Commerce du Montréal (Montreal Board of Trade) Michel Leblanc have just released the results of the Ernst and Young feasibility study commissioned by the Cro. 

The 62 page Document (this word is always capitilazed within the Document and it should be because it's a pretty slick Document) is available for the public to peruse at their leisure:

http://montrealbaseballproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Feasibility_Study.pdf

It's 10 pm eastern standard time, and I seem to have some leisure time right about now...so I'm going to do some perusing. Why not? In this following article we shall be highlighting key components within the Document in an attempt to convince nay-sayers of the return of the Expos that...Yes, Major League Baseball in Montréal is 100% viable.

Summary of the "Document"

The Ernst and Young study is broken down into sections. The main conclusion of the report is for Montréal to adopt the methods of the Minnesota region and what they did with the Twins.

"The centrally located, open-air stadium (in a similar climate) was essential to retaining the Twins in Minneapolis, and the stadium has been a success for the MLB, for the fans and for the city’s development."

The comparison of Minnesota and Montréal is a good comparison because the cities are fairly similar in many data metrics. The populations are fairly similar, the weather conditions are very similar, the average income per household is fairly similar, etc. They also cite the similarities between the cities extend to baseball as well. The Twins and Expos were both slated to be contracted in 2002 by Major League Baseball and both cities played in huge dome style stadiums with astro-turf.

The Twins, however, solved their stadium woes and became viable again by contesting contraction in all levels of court led by the Heroic Governor Jesse "The Body" Ventura (I like this guy, it was cool to see his name in the Document). Eventually they built a nice, new, baseball-style, non-cavern stadium and have been doing well ever since.

The statistics they provided for the construction and financing of Target Field in Minnesota are the following:

Construction start date: August 30, 2007

Date opened: January 4, 2010

Architect: Populous/Hammel, Green and Abrahamson

Capacity: 39,021

54 suites, 2 mega suites

Funding: Combination of Minnesota Ballpark Authority
(64%) and Minnesota Twins (36%)

Ballpark construction cost: $390M

City infrastructure cost: $155M


It states that the Minnesota stadium was linked to the downtown core in order to be a very accessible and chill area. They "constructed a large plaza in the outfield to connect the stadium to the downtown core" in order to syngergize the stadium with other local business (i.e. restaurants, pubs, boutiques, etc.).

When they talk about accessibility they are referring to how how easy it is to get to and out of the stadium. Target Field has 2 major freeways connecting to it, 20 busses passing by it, 7,000 parking spots, and hundreds of bike racks.

If you remember, Montréal's original stadium incarnation was buried way out of the downtown core at Pie-IX metro. They are suggesting to build a festive and accessible hub in the downtown core that will lure locals and tourists to the area which is a great idea.

They cite in a Minnesota based economic study,

"According to an independent economic impact analysis, Target Field also generated at least $169.3 million in economic activity in its first year of operation"

That's not baseball related, that's due to the area surrounding the stadium becoming prime real estate for opening enterprises and drawing investors to open businesses in the area.

The study found that the ideal division for the Montréal 2.0 team to play in is the AL East citing that,

"The new franchise should ideally play in the American League East – the team would have natural rivalries with several cities including Toronto, Boston and New York. The presence of these teams in Montreal would enhance the business case as well as the local television broadcasting rights deal – playing against more popular teams results in a larger television audience"

I hate the Designating Hitter rule, but hey, beggars can't be choosers, eh? I have to 100% agree with this assessment. Just like Canadiens vs. Bruins or Canadiens vs. Leafs...this set-up will maximize rivalry multipliers and get fans all rabid. Nothing works me up more than losing to Toronto at something. If we were in the same division, forget it, it will be mass hysteria bro...I'm talking mass hysteria, dude.

The Document covers data from a poll of a sample size of Montréal citizens and business leaders and the data is used to from projections (or you could call them prognostications too). These projections are pretty meaty numbers and would make quite of few entrepreneurs mouth water while reading them. Taking into account the demand and the average income per household they create a maximization algorithm for ticket pricing and the numbers look very good.

The study has a great section on economic impact for the region which has some pretty meaty figures in it too. Synergizing the construction phase, the operation of the club, and the tourism attracted to the city... it shows the positive economic impact of the return of baseball would be immediately noticeable. They provide figures for GDP generated and the jobs created by this venture. They conclude on this matter,

"In total, the new ballpark would support approximately 1,500 jobs annually in Quebec during the construction phase with the impact on GDP being approximately $130M annually – two thirds of this effect would be in Montreal

Operation of a new ballpark would support (annually) 825 direct jobs, plus 600 indirect and induced jobs, with an approximate contribution of $96M to Quebec GDP"

This Document is a pretty good read, if you're interested in data and baseball and things like that (like me) then you should probably peruse it.


Common Rebuttals to Nay-Sayers

Some of the most frequent statements by nay-sayers countering the viability of Montréal will likely be of the following nature. One common point that will be brought up is something along the lines of,

"It's cold in Montréal...how can they play in an open air stadium without a roof?"

It is stated that Minnesota has a very similar climate to Montréal and the study presents these factoids on the matter,

Average Montreal Temperature during Baseball Season: 15.5 C
Average Minnesota Temperature during Baseball Season: 16.2 C

Look, it's pretty hot here in the summer during baseball season. Yeah in April and October it's going to be cold but less than one degree celcigrade isn't going to be the end of anyone's world.

The Document insists that roofed or retractable-roofed stadium is not needed. The production costs are almost cut by a third by using an open-air model as opposed to a roofed model and the drawbacks to being open air (even in a colder climate) seem to be little if not none.

Nextly, the BIGGEST issue from nay-sayers is going to be that that study suggests the provincial government put up 300 million for building the stadium. Everyone's gonna be all,

"But the bridges are broken! How can you even think of putting money into a ball park!?"

First of all bridges fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government of Canada. It's federal tax dollars that are used to alter infrastructure or to repair bridges. Bridges are not the jurisdiction of the provincial government.

Secondly, look, this is a pretty big business and businesses are taxed by the government. This enterprise will generate quite a lot of tax revenue. How much? The Document projects the following data,

"The government’s share of costs would be recouped through direct tax payments generated in the construction phase ($55.6M) and during each year of operation ($23M annually), as well as by dedicating sales taxes generated annually by stadium activities ($18M) and income tax on part of players’ salaries ($10M)"

The minimum tax they can collect off this in a construction year is 55.6 Million and during an operational year they would get a minimum of 51 Million per year. You don't need to be a genius or a Master Cross Multiplier to figure out how quickly they will recoup the money on their investment. Three hundred divided by and average of 53 million is about six years. Following the sixth year all the 50+ million in tax revenue becomes 100% profit for the government.

The Document even lists measures in the case the provincial government refuses to put in any money (even though they will benefit over 50 million per year from this venture) and also lists several faster methods for the government to recoup its initial investment in the case that it makes a huge deal about making the capital investment back faster than six years. They have all their bases covered ok? These guys are pros.

Conclusion

Mr. Cromartie concluded the press conference today stating that,

"Baseball is a game of history and numbers. Montréal has the history and now Montréal has the numbers."

I made an amateurish projection piece in this blog once (Speculation/Prognostications), but this data in the Ernst and Young report is not speculations...this is HARD DATA. Montréal has legit numbers now that should make both the business community here and MLB take notice.

Mr. Cromartie proceeded to call out to the business community and implored for a "champion" to step up to the plate and make history. Hopefully somebody or a combination of sombodies heeds the call.

Montréal? We got the history, we got the numbers...hey, we got the food, we got the ladies, we got the fresh beats, we got the jams, we got the style....hey, we got it all....we GOT THE TOOLS AND WE GOT THE TALENT!!!!

Rock the Hall 3

When the snow starts falling that means the Hall of Fame voting season is about to get under way. It's becoming sort of a winter tradition to promote Timmy Raines for the Hall of Fame.

2011 piece) The Hall of Fame is Incomplete without Tim Raines in it

2012 piece) On Tim Raines and the Hall of Fame (again) 

This year we're going to focus on some "what if" projections to showcase some flashy numbers. I love projecting using statistics ever since I first learned about it. You know that cross-multiplying business? I love that...I really honestly enjoy cross-multiplying. I cross multiply like a mad man sometimes. I cross multiply like a bat outta hell and don't even think twice about it. I like taking data of past trends to project future trends...it's really really fun. You can use it to quantify and project all kinds of stuff too not just baseball statistics.

Cross Multiplication

Alrighty, so in this year's traditional Tim Raines for Hall of Fame article, we shall take it simple and take two events from the past and apply cross multiplication to produce "what-if" scenarios.

First off, let's take a nice past event, like the 1981 season, which for Expos fans is like THE season of seasons. Here's Rock's stat line from the 1981 campaign:

Plate Appearances: 363
Hits: 95
Walks: 45
Stolen Bases: 71
Caught Stealin': 11

As many of you know, the 1981 Major League baseball campaign was a strike shortened due to labor disputes and it was not a standard 162 game season. In a standard season players, and in this case a leadoff batter, can get up to 700+ plate appearances. You know where I'm going with this right? If he stole 71 bases in 363 plate appearances...then how many would he have stole if the season was a standard 162 game season instead of a shortened one?

Enter now my homie...Mr. Cross Multiplication,

71 over 363...over a nice round number such as 700 would give us...137.

If he continued at that pace, the Rock would have stole 137 bases in 1981. That's 7 more than the 130 Rickey Henderson stole in 1982 which is the most all time. If the strike never happened Rock could have been the single season stolen base champion, it is very conceivable and highly plausible.

The second data set we shall take is the 1987 MLB campaign. The Rock's plate appearances were hindered in this season due to the collusion against free agents conspired against the players by the owners (see: 1987 collusion). He missed a full month of games due to the collusion and produced these numbers in that time:

Games: 139
Plate Appearances: 627
Runs: 123
Hits: 175
Walks: 90
Homers: 18
Steals: 50
Catched Stealin': 5

Okay let's get some numbers to work with...

1. 162 (games in standard season) - 139 =  23
2. Cross multiply PA with G and add 23 games worth would give us...103 extra PA to total 730.

Okay...so what would these numbers have been in a 730 PA season? Once again using our best friend cross multiplication, the hypothetical results are:

Games: 162
Plate Appearances: 730
Runs: 143
Hits: 203
Walks:  104
Homers: 21
Steals: 58
Catched Stealin': 5

Yeah...143 runs scored.

Without the collusion, Raines could have conceivably and very plausibly scored more than 140 runs in 1987...which is quite a lot. To me runs are what wins games, it doesn't matter to me if a player crossed the plate from a homerun or because he was wicked fast at getting around the bases. I know to most fans homeruns are the coolest thing ever and all but a run is a run and someone who can score that many runs in a year is pretty amazing.

For people or voters who think homeruns are the only important thing in baseball this projection also shows that Raines could have surpassed the arbitrary mark of 20 homers in a season as well. He had decent power too if that's what you want.

Conclusion

Just a short and brief Raines for Hall of Fame article this year. If you're a Hall of Fame voter some of these projection stats may stand out to you though. Without the strike of 1981 or the collusion of 1987 some pretty impressive stats may have landed in the columns of Tim Raines' baseball card.

137 Stolen Bases in 1981
143 Runs Scored  in 1987

Pretty intense if you ask me.

A Small Retraction Concerning Statements about Ernest

In regards to my short dissertation on Ernest the other day, I would like to make a glaring and sweeping retraction.

Article in Question: The Greatest Debate Still Rages On...

I concluded by suggesting that the Ernest character should be revived. Yet, after looking at wannabe Ernests attempt to emulate and employ the Ernest on the internet...I cannot honorably stand beside that conclusion any longer.

Example of a Pseudo-Ernest:

Ok, No. No, no, no, no, no. This man is not Ernest. This is an obvious disgrace.

I've come to the realization that there Can Only be One....Jim Varney is the only Ernest...I hereby retract my conclusion in the previous article, for it was wrong.

I admit, I was not correct, not in the least with that assessment. I feel a great deal of shame over the failure of my analytic abilities.

My new stance on the question is as so...

Let Sleeping Ernests Lie.

The Greatest Debate Still Rages on...

So much in the news these days. So much to think about and have opinions on. I think as a society we must settle old debates before venturing into new ones. We must tie up these loose ends before biting off new and more difficult debates.


First on the docket is one debate which remains open and has never been resolved, this debate in question, of course, is the Joel vs. Mike debate. It is a question as old as time itself. Weighing all of the options, the correct conclusion to this question is:

Joel

Case dismissed. Moving right along, the next item on humanity's docket of unresolved dilemmas is what many refer to as "The Greatest Debate" and I must say I agree with the designation of this query being regarded as such. The Greatest Debate which has raged on for many years is... 

...what was the Greatest Ernest film ever made?

Now unlike the Joel vs. Mike debate which is easily decided with little thought or after-thought, the case of what was the Greatest Ernest film in the history of Ernest is a whole different can of worms, Vern.

Who Was Ernest?

Before we get knee-deep into this burning question on all of our minds, let's look into the phenomenon that was Ernest for those of you who may have either been living under a rock or not born yet in the era in which Ernest was Ernesting.

Ernest was a veritable amalgamation of heavily versatile yet good-hearted stupidity portrayed by the iconoclastic actor Jim Varney.

Jim Varney was an accomplished actor of the theater (seriously), and his first big television appearance was on Fernwood 2 Night hosted by Martin Mull (side-windered by Fred Willard),

Above, he's doing some variation of a "redneck" character. I know these sort of "redneck" characters are popular now a days with the likes of Jeff Foxworthy and that Fat Boy the Cable Fat Idiot...but there's a huge difference between the likes of Jim Varney and those talentless hacks. The key being that Varney's character(s) are funny whilst todays so-called "Blue Collar Comedians" lead by Jeff Hacksworthy are not. 

Varney first developed the character we know as Ernest for commercials for various southern United States companies (ads for milk, tape, meller yellers, etc., etc.).

At some point someone realized that his character was testing very well with children viewers and the Ernest phenomenon grew wings and took shape. Much in the vein of old time 1950s acts that kids loved such as Johnny Jelly Bean or Soupy Sales, the program Hey Vern! It's Ernest was one of the big three whacky kids shows which came about in the late 1980s era (the other two being Pee Wee Herman's and briefly Al Yankovic's Saturday morning programs).

The Ernestial Explosion was in full gear. Soon, Ernest had his own special, vhs tapes, tv show, and finally MOVIES! That Ernest made a slew of exciting and efficacious Ernest films. For example (but not limited to):

Ernest Goes to Vegas
Ernest Learns Karate
Ernest in Africa
Ernest at the Theme Park
Ernest Saves Christmas
Ernest gets Motivated
Hey Vern! Ernest just Joined the Navy!
Ernest Scared Stupid
Ernest Goes to Jail
Ernest at the Improv
Ernest in Funny Munny
Hey Vern, Win $10,000...Or Just Count On Having Fun!
Ernest Goes to Camp
Ernest Rides Again
Ernest Goes to School
Slam Dunk Ernest
Ernest in the Army
Hey Vern! How 'bout that Ernest!?
Quitting Smoking with Ernest
Ernest Goes to the Park


Yet Only One Ernest Movie May Reign Supreme

Look, I understand that a lot of people "don't get" Ernest...but those people are dumb. I'll go as far (and on record) as saying that anyone who doesn't like Ernest is a Bad Person.

Ok so, for us regular normal Good Persons, I would like now to present to whoever wishes to know of it, my opinion on this long raging debate. Which was the best Ernest film?

I will only focus on five Ernest films (in the interest of time) and those Ernest films are in no particular order:

Ernest Saves Christmas
Ernest Goes to Camp
Ernest Goes to Jail
Ernest Scared Stupid

and last but least (well maybe),

Ernest Rides Again


1. Ernest Saves Christmas

Synopsis: Ernest is working as a cab driver to make ends meet this Holiday Season and picks up a man claiming to be Santa Claus in his cab. The purported Santa must find a successor to carry on the Santa torch before nightfall or Christmas will be ruined. Will Santa find a successor in time?

My Opinion: This film is not very Ernest heavy. The story focuses on other characters (Santa, the successor, and the runaway tween girl) more so than it does on Ernest. Ernest is almost a supporting actor in this film and it's a gross miscarriage of intelligence when that is the case. Making an Ernest movie which is light on the Ernest is not the right way to go.

Would you make a Yogi Bear episode without much Yogi in it? Would you make an A-Team movie without Mr. T in it (come on, why did they do that?)? Would you make an Evil Dead movie without Bruce Campbell in it (seriously why did they do this?)? It's like making a peanut butter sandwich but forgetting to put on the peanut butter is what it is and it's fairly unfathomable to operate like that, I must say.

2. Ernest Goes to Camp:

Synopsis: Ernest finally fulfills his life-long dream of becoming a camp counselor after working as a maintenance man at the camp for years. Sadly, he was only promoted because the other counselors didn't want to deal with a troublesome group of youths sent from the juvenile hall for rehabilitation. Ernest gets stuck with these inner city toughs yet he and the youths really develop an understanding and respect each other.

A villainous natural resource developer played by the always impeccable John Vernon attempts to force the venerable Chief Saint Cloud (portrayed by Iron Eyes Cody) to give him his land.

Faced with the under-handed tactics of the treacherous Krader Company...Chief Saint Cloud is left with no choice but to train Ernest and his gang of inner-city youths and instill unto them the ways of the Warrior. Can Ernest and his rag-tag troupe of diamond-in-the-rough youths act as the front-line defense against Krader, repel the intruders, and save Kamp Kikakee? Or will all be lost?

My Opinion: This movie came out around the time where I would go to Camp Jackson Dodds every summer and have zany adventures and a ton of laughs of my own. The whole camp atmosphere of the film was something I could really relate to as a youth.

The themes touched on within this film, such as Native American issues with the establishment and the difficulty under-privileged kids face in comparison to privileged kids, were a little deeper than the themes in standard Ernest films. It's a pretty deep movie, it has loads of character. Man, this movie is Punk Rock, it really is.

3. Ernest Goes to Jail:

Synopsis: Ernest is an up and coming janitor in a bank who's dream is to one day become a bank teller. He has eyes for his co-worker, the beautiful and charming Charlotte Sparrow and truth be told she has eyes for him as well.

Misfortune befalls our loveable hero when he gets called for jury duty for the trial of one Felix Nash, a dead ringer for Ernest, one might even say his doppelganger. In a flurry of confusion on a visit to the prison Nash pulls the old switcheroo on our best bud Ernest and assumes his place...while Ernest goes to jail.

What will Nash do while living as Ernest on the outside? How will Ernest cope with the harsh realities of prison life?

My Opinion: This movie is shakespearean in nature. People will tell you that the rawness of a play like Othello, with all the emotions flying everywhere, as the lead character feels fear, betrayal, jealousy and anger, amounts to an emotional roller coaster for the audience...yet Othello is not a very good play in comparison to Ernest Goes to Jail.

The emotions in this film are very raw. Rawer than Othello. Take for example when the evil Felix Nash lures Ernest's girlfriend to his nest of deceit and tries to convince her to commit the heinous act of adultery under the most unrighteous of pretenses. Jim Varney's portrayal of both the hero and villain displays his versatility as an theater actor. Many might scorn my comparison of Ernest Goes to Jail to Shakespeare but I honestly believe this to be true in all seriousness. Jim Varney is an unstoppable force of acting in this film.

4. Ernest Scared Stupid

Synopsis: Years in the past, an evil troll roamed around Briarville, Mississippi turning young children into wooden dolls and absorbing their energy. Ernest's ancient ancestor, the great Phineas Worrell, devised a method to seal the evil troll into a big ole oak tree.

Fast forward to the present and poor bumbling Ernest P. Worrell unwittingly releases the seal of the oak tree and unleashes the troll once again. The dastardly troll recommences turning defenseless children into wooden dolls and after he absorbs the spirits of 5 children the troll can unleash his army of lesser demon trolls to begin a reign of terror. The only thing that stands in his way...is Ernest and a wise Haitian woman.

My Opinion: A standard spooky monster movie, but the threat to the kids is made to feel real to the viewer. The troll is very successful at turning innocent children into lifeless wood carvings of their former selves. It's a movie that despite Ernest's antics would genuinely scare a very young child and give them some cool-ass fever-dream nightmares too. Ernest does a lot of heroic mano-y-mano fighting in this film and pulls off a sort of Buffoon Bad Ass character...once again displaying his immense range with the Ernest acting style.

5. Ernest Rides Again

Synopsis: The crown jewels of the Royal Family of England get stolen and transported in a cannon and Ernest and some geek have to do something about it.

My Opinion: I had this thing on VHS ..and I must have watched this movie like 100 times...and it sucks. I don't know why I watched it so much but I guess there was never anything else on.

The geeky doctor was played by a guy named Ron James, who's a popular Canadian comedian now. He speaks normally in this film though which is odd because in his present day act he talks like how a retarded Canadian guy would talk.

This movie is proof that the voice Ron James uses in his act is not his own voice and he's trying to "hose-it-up" so to speak to appeal to Canadian audiences. I think Ron James is going Full Hoser though and it's kind of an over-done act. I understand that Canadians have to hose-it-up to sell (even the brilliant Canadian director Christian Kole made a hoser movie once) but Ron James shouldn't go Full Hoser, and if he wants to he should put on a tuque, drink some stubbies, and send Bob and Doug a royalty cheque.

All in all, Ernest Rides Again isn't an Elite Ernest picture.

The Greatest Ernest Movie of All Time is...

Ernest Goes to Camp.

La crème de la crème of Ernest is the one where he goes to camp. There's no doubt about it.

Gee I'm glad it's rainin'
There's always something to be thankful for.
I'm awfully glad it's raining
Cause no one sees your tear drops when it pours.

And no one knows the thunder
Is your heartbreak in disguise,
They think the rainy nights
What put that sad look in your eyes.

Sure am glad it's rainin'.
The gentle rythmn soothes the pain inside.
I'm glad the stars aren't shining.
A wounded warrior needs a place to hide.

I thought I had found someone
I could count on til the end.
What they wanted was a hero,
All I needed was a friend

Gee I'm glad it's rainin'.
I hope the morning sun won't come up soon.
As long as it keeps raining,
No one knows my heart broke right in two.

I thought I had found someone
I could count on til the end.
What they wanted was a hero,
All I needed was a friend

Sure am glad it's rainin'.
I'm awfully glad it's rainin'

Passing the Torch

For those of you living blissfully unaware lives, Ernest died in 2000 of cancer. Yeah, on February 12th of the year 2000...the earth stood still for a moment as Ernest had to say goodbye to us.

People may not have realized it yet, but Ernest's passing has left a hole. The universe is incomplete without Ernest. We need Ernest.

I'm calling out to everyone in Hollywood to listen up. I'm calling out to every artist, stand up, and preformer to put down what they are doing and listen.

Someone out there has to become Ernest. Someone has to step up and accept the torch. Someone has to put on the grey t-shirt, dawn the jean-vest, and adorn themselves with the grey cap. It's not a joke anymore...Universe needs Ernest.

Now I'm not talking like when Hollywood re-booted The Three Stooges with three horrible lame-wads. That 2012 Three Stooges Movie is a punishable crime, it's almost blasphemous in terms of its mockery of comedy. Taking something as good as the Three Stooges and turning it into shit is the absolute worst thing that could to be done to bring Ernest back.

No, I'm not talking about a money-making horrible reboot. I'm talking about someone becoming Ernest. I'm talking about someone accepting the responsibility of being The Ernest. Putting the three holy vestments of The Ernest on some unfunny bozo and releasing a movie with the Ernest name is not the plan.

The Plan is to do it right. The plan is for the New Ernest to dawn the vestments and be proud of them...to put on the Ernest uniform and WANT to make COMEDY proud. I'm talkin' to you.

You, YEAH YOU! Step up! Put it on! Become ERNEST...

 

Satire Wars: Refutation of Statements by One Chris Hedges in Defense of One Jon Stewart

I'm a regular dude just like you and everyone you know. I do the same stuff you do, you know...I get together with my friends over tea at times and discuss the heroes of the age. We talk about who's the Master Tacticians (i.e. Earl Weaver) of the age but we also discuss who are the Master Satirists (i.e. Sacha Baron Cohen) of our era.

When we discuss the Master Satirists of the Age, should names like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert be considered? I believe so, yes I most surely do. It doesn't seem one pulitzer prize winner named Chris Hedges would agree with that though:

http://acronymtv.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/stephen-colbert-and-john-stewart-have-destroyed-satire-chris-hedges/

In this video, while he and a colleague discuss (not over tea) the Master Satirists of the Age, Hedges absolutely blasts Stewart and Colbert:

"Satire becomes destroyed in essence in the hands of figures like Colbert, John Stewart and others,” Hedges asserts. “They will attack the excesses or the foibles of the system, but they are never going to expose the system itself because they are all millionaires, they are commercially supported. You have very few people (George Carlin was one) who will stand up and do it. If you do that, it is tough to make a living. Carlin maybe being the exception. But if you really use Satire the way Swift used Satire, to expose the English barbarity in Ireland because culture, like everything else in the society has been completely corporatized."

I disagree with this assertion. I really do.

Hedges

First off, who is this Hedges character? The first time I ever heard of this guy was when he had some sort of altercation on TV with a CBC analyst.

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k)

I agree with a lot of what Hedges says, but I don't respect his ability to handle trolls. The interviewer is a talking-head in Canada who makes a Tiger of Money formula show and who's shtick is the "bad mean judge" character (a la Simon Cowell). I don't respect how Hedges gets all offended and says he'll never ever come back.

Look, I've been fucking around on the internet since Usenet, man. I've been trolled, got trolled, done the troll, re-trolled, counter-trolled, de-trolled, un-trolled, front trolled, and even back trolled. I've employed the swift-kick ,the ego-stitch, and the body-snatch and have had all those things done to me. I'm a dymaxion troll, I can handle trollin' from all angles whilst trollin' and counter trollin' at the same time.

In this argument between O'Leary and Hedges, the obvious troll is obvious...yet O'Leary still manages to get Hedges' goat. It's actually kind of sad.

What about my homeboys Stewart and Colbert? How do they deal with these types of characters? Do they let the name calling and invective get under their skin or do they enter dymaxion-mode?

Here's Colbert's character exchanging blows with one Bill O'Reilly and his media character:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QquTUR9nbC4)

This is more in the style of the internet "debating" that I'm used to. In this match-up we have two characters, with two goats (one each)...yet only one man will leave with his goat. My man Colbert is as cool as a cucumber throughout the entire match and maintains his goat through the early stages. O'Reilly ups the invective by about 200% and begins literally yelling at Colbert...yet he keeps his goat. When it's all said and done Mr. O'Reilly seems flustered and jealous that Colbert is "more popular than him."

Even on O'Reilly's home turf Colbert managed to leave this veritable Thunderdome...with TWO goats. Why? Because he's a bad ass fucking man, that's why.

Yet way before Colbert was coming on this types of "spin" shows and doing battle, Mr. Jon Stewart had already conquered that circuit:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE)

This video is up to 6.1 million views now and it deserves them. Is Jon Stewart responding to the heat by whining, crying, and gettin' flustered like that Chris Hedges? No, because Jon Stewart is a bad ass motherfucking guy.

This is a two-on-one situation and old Jon is the one shorthanded...YET...he is still guiding the tempo of the debate, keeping his shit and bein' cool.

Man, to keep your cool in that 2-on-1 and be witty is pretty bad ass. If I was being fucked with by some bitch in a bow-tie...I would have mauled that fucking dude.

Anyways, the issue I'm trying to raise here is that Chris Hedges is kind of a weiner.

Stewart

I like Jon Stewart, he can be pretty cool sometimes. The first time I ever saw him on TV, he was playing with toys. He had an action figure of Screech off of Saved by The Bell and he was fooling around talking in a high voice for the action figure (kind of like the act they do on Robot Chicken). I remember thinking to myself...this guy's goin' places.

Out of those three vids above, Jon's has by far the most hits. He's popular, in fact he's so popular that countries with far more oppressive governments are using his Satire Model and character template.

Here's a video of Jon in Egypt:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEO2Rd3sJbA)

Bassem Youssef's version of Stewart's show is not something that part of the world is used to.

I wrote a few months back about how making fun of your government or military in some countries is the ultimate crime. That Baba Jukwa in Zimbabwe that I wrote about, there's still a man hunt out for him and people have died under the suspicion of being Baba. Making a joke is not a joke in some places...it's serious business. Satire is even taking hold in Zimbabwe nowadays (anyone ever check out Nyoka and Kunyepa?).

In the case of Bassem Youssef, take this recent article:

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/29/egypt-authoritiestoinvestigatetopsatiristbassemyoussef.html

The Egyptian government is investigating Mr. Youssef just for making fun of "nationalist sentiments". That's pretty fucked up.

Jon Stewart also ran a bit on his show which caused major controversy in the Oldest Country in the Vorld...The Iran. The Daily Show visited Iran and interviewed everyday people to try and show they are actually very very similar to you and me. It's harder to want to go to war and bomb people when you see how human they are. This bit was pretty good.

See: "Behind the Veil"

One of the men interviewed in that segment was later accused by the Iranian government of being a spy for doing this interview. Don't fret though, everything has cooled down and the man, Maziar Bahari, and Jon are currently making a film together.

Conclusion

Look, when your satire template is being used by people in a Muslim country to make fun of their government...you know you're on to something with your shtick. Okay?

So, back to my main point. When me and my friends gather over tea and discuss the Master Satirists of the Age, the names Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert do tend to come up, and we discuss their merits at length.

Do you know which name never ever comes up?

Chris Hedges.

Edge-Pushing Cartoons: Cartoons with No Bounds or Bars

Certain comedy cartoons which are not aimed at the little child target market have developed massive popularity over the last thirty years or so. These certain cases of cartoons achieving mass appeal has categorically been due to the program's satirical qualities and its ability to make fun of the real universe in its cartoon meta-universe.

The world of Omni-popular cartoons aimed at everyone except little babies is a small historical sample size to work with. We shall be looking into the four cartoons which have garnered mass appeal over the last few decades (shows which have generated huge audience, movie deals, etc.).

We shall give these shows a final tally and rating based on....um....I dunno.

You can rate stuff with numbers, obviously, but it's not an all encompassing variables rating system by any stretch. You can assign something a 5 or a 77 or even a 88.125 but what does that really tell anyone? It's just a dumb number.

You can use letters and assign something an A+ or a C- or a D, but again, they are just dumb old letters. Some people try and use "stars" like gold ones because they look cool, and some folks use "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" but that is only a two-variable system which leaves no room for any details. You either have a gold star or a upward thumb or you don't...pretty shoddy system.

I believe I shall use a geometric rating system. Yes, the shows shall be rated using standard geometric shapes. Each component of the cartoon show which improves it will be shown with a face/vertex/frequency/side. Whilst each bad component of the show shall materialize itself within the shape as well.

So, yeah. Our rating system for this review shall be geometric in nature. The final grade shall indeed be a shape.

The Simpsons

Everyone is familiar with this show, it does not matter whether you live in Kathmandu, Podunk or North Haverbrook. This is the first show which exploded into an all encompassing target market behemoth which rained down comedy on the masses. An instant success.

I was in the first grade (age 6.5) when the Simpsons came on the scene and its culture bomb invaded my elementary school in a decisive wave of popularity. Every kid had Bart Simpson shit...t-shirts, lunch boxes, stickers. Yo, one time I was standing in line in like grade 3 and this girl wanted to look at my Bart Simpson t-shirt where Bart is dressed as a Ninja Turtle (combined marketing appeal) and I couldn't turn to show her. I felt really sick that day and she was getting mad at me for not turning to show it to her....and then I puked. Everywhere. It was the only time I ever puked at school. I puked a lot though and the teacher gave me a blue rectangular container to puke in. It sucked and was embarrassing but when I think about it now...I laugh. I remember it pretty good for something that happened like 22 years ago.

Anyway, the Simpsons was very well written when it first came out. The creator Matt Groening was the mind behind Life in Hell and ran the Simpsons as a short on the Tracy Ullman show before hitting it big. The early shows were heart felt and down-to-earth and very likeable. They were the most loveable dysfunctional unit of humans on T.V. and they weren't even real people. Shows about how they got their dog or how Lisa coped with her obtuse opinions were very well received with audiences.

As tame as the 90s Simpsons is by today's standards....it was hated by parents/teachers/church/etc back in the day. Early Simpsons did indeed push the edge, it made fun of our society by exaggeratingly mirroring it in their yellow tinted universe. The good part about old Simpsons episodes can be summed up with one word...subtlety. The satire and rebellious nature wasn't as in your face as the shows that came after it but it was always there.

Take a look at the authority figures in the Simpsons for example. None of them are presented as being competent or regarded as upright citizens. The Mayor is a crook, the chief of police is a pig-faced moron, the owner of the nuclear power plant (the richest man in town) is down right evil and sadistic. There's nothing wholesome or heroic about these people....these aren't your Leave it to Beaver friendly people in your neighborhood types. Yet they are more realistic that's for sure. It was not common in programs watched by young people in this era to find authority figures being presented in this realistic fashion.

The Simpsons was the original Edge-Pusher and it broke ground subtly, left a huge mark, and was the trail blazer for future Edge-Pusher cartoons. Sadly, the Simpsons got really horrible at some point and never regained composure.

I've been trying to pinpoint where it officially jumped the shark, and I think I have the answer.

NO FONZE DON'T DO IT! THERE'S NO WAY BACK!

Where exacty did the Simpsons jump on water-skies and attempt to publish a show to the airwaves so unforgivably retarded that they crossed shark infested waters and had no way of ever getting back to where they once were?

For me personally, I remember when it happened, and I remember well. In Season 9 they ran a show so pointless and convoluted for no apparent reason other than that they had literally NO ideas left. The show in question is where Seymour Skinner reveals that he is not Seymour Skinner but is actually...Armin Tanzarian.

Never has a story line been so pointless, never has a cliff hanger been so stupid, never has an idea been so convoluted and inherently pointless as the Armin Tanzarian episode. I remember sitting there after the show was over and having an inner dialogue with my stupid ol' self that was like...

"Wait, that was really bad..."

"But, the Simpsons is cool...how can something cool be bad? It's a fallacy"

"No, but this was shit. This episode was total shit. Why did they go with this idea?"

"You're crazy. The Simpsons rules and it always will!"

"You're wrong self. The Simpsons sucks. It's terrible. It's the WORST EPISODE EVER"

"...but, if the Simpsons sucks, what else is cool that actually sucks?"

"I dunno bro...probably EVERYTHING EVER"

(Me, inner monologue, circa 1997)

The idea that "The Simpsons Sucks" smashed my rosy-colored view of the world and left me feeling very cynical. Next thing I know...everything sucked. Like, I watched an episode of Saturday Night Live (which the previous week was ok)...but after Armin Tanzarian water-skied over a sea of venomous sharks...SNL started to look like total shit too. I couldn't even watch it, I wanted to jump into the screen and tell Kris Kattan to stop making a mockery of comedy and find something better to do. I haven't watched either of these shows in 15 years.

So to whoever wrote that episode of the Simpsons back in 1997 (Ken Keeler), way to go man. Thanks for ruining the Simpsons dude.

Rating: Thanks to nine good seasons (1989-1997) The Simpsons has some good depth to its shape. Nine sturdy lines, nine healthy and witty vertexes. Yet thanks to 16 horrible seasons to its name the shape is represented differently. It's nine-sided nonogonic nucleus of sturdy good qualities is overshadowed by an entwining 16-sided uncomfortably cumbersome hexakaidecagon. The final tally of the result of its rating is:

Nonogonal Nucleiic Hexakaidecagon

As you can see the nine-sided nucleus is well connected and sturdy...yet the additional 16 sides of the polygon are cumbersome and unnecessary. The only logical geometric rating to give The Simpsons is the Nonogonal Nucleiic Hexakaidecagon, obviously and undoubtedly. 

If making some cartoons is like building a house...then who would want to build a house shaped like a Nonogonal Nucleiic Hexakaidecagon? Probably Ken Keeler.

Beavis and Butthead

 
Okey-doke, so naturally moving along chronologically in our compendium of cartoons we arrive at the hit 1993 cartoon show...Beavis and Butthead.

I've written before about my enjoyment derived from watching this program so the rating may be a tad biased but it's just a stupid blog about my opinions so that's all you're gonna get. You're gonna get heavily biased views. Thank you very much.

This show had a million times more controversy than the Simpsons ever generated. From Senators denouncing it on the house floor, to Carl Sagan denouncing it in Demon Haunted World. This show got up everybody's trouser legs and just like the Simpsons it took a great deal of subtle (well not so subtle) satire up there with it.

 Now who is dis here Beevo and Buffcoats what-have-ya?

Previous entries on Beavis and Butthead: 

1. Beavis and Butthead are Back

2. Dear Carl Sagan Who art in Somewheres...

Rating: Beavis and Butthead had 1+6+1 seasons. Yet the first season was of notoriously poor quality and offered no subtly (straight out shock 'til you drop style). So in essence it is 6 core seasons + 1 notoriously bad one (1993) + 1 late-addition REALLY GOOD add-on (2011). It is in essence a hexagonal base structure yet it's core has so much depth that the lines are not flat. In fact it is a six faced structure...a cube to be more precise. 

The first season acts as a rough nucleus of non-concentric circle wavelengths radiating at the core of the six-faced core-cube. The first season acting as the most offensive season thus a radio-wave catalyst and driving force...yet still very unrefined. The 8th and final season in 2011 acts as a second wavelength of concentric circles which merges with the non-concentric circle wavelengths to create Pi (π)  and smooth out the core into a smooth sphere. Yes, Beavis and Butthead's most accurate rating variable in regards to this review is the Sphere-Nucleus Cube.

 Sphere-Nucleus Cube

South Park 

Our next sequential entry is the take-no-prisoners tour-de-force known as "South Park." Its first episode aired in 1997 and I remember it well. 

A station in my region bought the original 6 shows in 1997 and aired one...then waited for the complaints and ensuing damage-control needed before airing any others. Meanwhilst, in 1997 the internet was going strong and I had already figured out how to stream videos and watch whatever the fuck I wanted.

So, lo and behold...all the kids at my high school were talking about how funny that ONE episode of South Park was and I dropped a bombshell when I stated that I had already seen six shows. Naturally no one believed me so I took the time to storyboard out the shows at lunch period and said to the naysayers...

"Ye who doubt that I have seen 6 episodes of South Park lest only watch when the other 5 finally air and ye shall see that all my divine prophecies ring true. For in the next installment, Kathie Lee Gifford is parodied and Cartman gets very very fat!" 

Obviously when the station in question did finally air the second episode my prediction rang true and all the two or maybe three people I told it to thought I was pretty friggin' cool and everything.

As far as controversy goes...honestly it didn't get as much as Beavis and Butthead because Mike Judge had kinda plowed a good deal of chillness (in regards to cartoons) into society by this juncture. 

Though South Park had to always do more and more and more to push the bar so low that not even fucking James Cameron could fish it out of the abyss. Yet through all the bar lowering the show stills has an acerbic deadly wit behind it. It's shock and awe, all the time, but when you burrow underneath the surface there's a lot of really intelligent stuff going on with this show.

Even after SEVENTEEN FUCKING YEARS the new season is looking strong. The tour-de-force has never lost its drive and there's even still potential in this show. Unlike the Simpsons which jumped the shark and died soon after...South Park has managed to find a way to be shark proof.

  As Shark Proof as The Batman

Maybe it was in Season 2 where they depicted Fonzie jumping over a shark...and then the shark caught and devoured Fonzie that broke the curse for them. Maybe they've been shark proof and free and at ease since 1998. Either way, alls I knows is, South Park is still good after 17 years.

Rating: It's a clean 17-sided Heptadecagon, no doubt about it. Each point of the Heptadecagon intersects geodesically with each other point at roughly 60 degree angles. Yes, South Park is undoubtedly a 60-degree intersecting well-made Heptadecagon. 

 60-Degree Intersecting Heptadecagon

Yes, yes it is. Oh and, since South Park has had 17 good seasons and The Simpsons has only had 9...

17 - 9 = 8

South Park is 8 units better than The Simpson mathematically. South Park is thus quantifiably Octahedronically better than The Simpsons.

Family Guy

It's becoming hip to rag on poor old Family Guy, but I want the record to show that I've never really been huge on this show and I'm not one of these band-wagonning anti-Family Guy genres of people. I believe Family Guy jumped the shark and began being pretty crappy at this juncture...

Yeah, Okay, he hurt his knee. What a cute joke. Okay, okay...good for fucking him. These types of jokes are the core of the show which is shrouded in an impenetrable wall of stolen bits. That basically is what Family Guy is. It was bad from the first season, right from the get-go, and will always be bad. There's no blips in the wavelength of shit...just shit...forever and ever.

Its geodesic shape is that of actual inertia. A straight line of never-ending/never-altering crap.

"Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its motion (including a change in direction). In other words, it is the tendency of objects to keep moving in a straight line at constant linear velocity, or to keep still." (wiki) 

Family Guy is a straight unchangeable line. What's more is they gave this show TWO clones of itself...American Dad and Cleveland. Meaning this straight line has two identical clones of it in its universe.

Rating: What do three straight identical measuring and angled lines give us?

Equilateral Triangle

Family Guy (and Family Guy ' and Family Guy '') are an equilateral triangle....of crap. Okay, it's not that bad, it can be funny sometimes but I think this rating variable really fits snug-like-a-glove in this case.

Conclusion

We have successfully concluded our geometric ranking of Edge/Boundary Pushing Cartoon shows and I believe it went well. Maybe I should go back to rating things with numbers or letters though.

I wanted to include good shows like Futurama and Ren and Stimpy (I think Ren and Stimpy has a big place in history honestly)...but these two are not omni-popular like the Big 4 Edge-Pushers are. Only 4 cartoons have had massive appeal.

Thank you and good night.

What's up with those Montreal Expos Baseball Fans? Seems like They Want that Baseball Back or somethin'...

I've wrote somewhat extensively on the Montreal Expos Renaissance Movement.

January, 8 of 2013: Speculations and/or Prognostications on Phase II of Montreal Baseball Project

April 4, of 2012:  After 34 years the Serious Heart Attack Fires still Burn Strong

In the prognosticative piece we delved into Warren Cromartie's Manifesto ("Montreal is a Five Tool City") on the return of the Expos...or I guess it's more of a Cro-Mafesto. Within the Cro-Mafesto we focused on the 4th point of the pentagon-pointed five-tools which make up this wonderful baseball city in my heavily speculative article.

Today we shall look into another piece of the pentagonal "5 Tools" (as such). We shall be looking into the "Passionate Fan Base" tool.

The other sports fan bases in this city we already know about. Not one person hasn't heard of the Montreal Canadiens hockey club. The Montreal Canadiens fans look at their city's hockey team as the life and essence of the city itself almost.

We wish to focus on the rabid fan base of baseball fans only.

Take this story:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/sports/expos-fans-pack-bleachers-at-toronto-game-hoping-to-lure-a-team-to-montreal-1.1375970

A contingent of 1,000 Expos fans comprised of hardcore fans, who never stopped believing in their team, dawned Expos gear and showed their colors at a Toronto Blue Jays game. Now granted 1,000 is not a huge number but it's only the tip of the ice berg of the rabid base that lies underneath the surface.

Last week, the New York Mets and Toronto Bluejays announced two exhibition games will be hosted at Montreal's Olympic Stadium. Within a week they have sold over 80,000 tickets for these games. Montreal wants baseball back. That's 80K tickets purchased by Montreal's fan base for exhibition (not even regular season) games. It seems they are serious about getting a team back.

That's how it starts...

A guy like Cromartie convinces everyone it's possible...The "baby steps" have been set in motion.

The ball gets rollin' and 1,000 people are convinced it's possible and crash a game in full Expos regalia...The Kool-Aid starts gettin' stirred up quick.

Then 80,000 people catch the Baseball Fever...Something's brewin' that's what it's doin'.

The wheels are now in motion...will 4 million people in the greater Montreal area catch the Fever? My guess is...Yes, it is most likely.

Memories of the Greatest

On a related note, Vladimir Guerrero has announced his official retirement from the game:

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/23645316/vladimir-guerrero-makes-retirement-official

Vlad was "The Last Mohican" of the Expos...or maybe Vlad was the "Last Samurai"...No, Vlad was the "Last Dragon..."

You aaaaaaare the Last Draaaaaaagon!

Out of all the Heroes, Legends, and Diamond Kings...Vladimir was Montreal's last Diamond King, our Last Dragon.

When many of the Montreal's Diamond Kings careers came to a close they ventured back here to receive their curtain call. Take the dearly departed, but still awesome in all our hearts, Gary Carter...

1992 Double Video

Or who could forget Tim Raines' triumphant return in 2001?

Rock 2001 Return

Yet, with the Expos no longer around...there will be no curtain call for our Last Dragon. Vladimir Guerrero won't get to double over Andre Dawson's head in right, or draw a walk while 55,000 fans stand and cheer during his entire at-bat like they did for Raines. If the Expos were still here Vlad would have been on the 2013 roster and he would have had an unforgettable curtain call at Olympic Stadium.

I will say this...Vlad was the most electrifying athlete who EVER played in this city. His talent was unfathomable.

The rumored story of how Vlad ended up here was that Tommy Lasorda kicked him off the Dodgers because Vladdy showed up with two different pairs of moldy old shoes and Tommy judged the book by the cover and assumed he was a bum. Felipe Alou recognized the diamond in the rough and invited the skinny awkard lanky kid to spring training.

He was the strong silent type. Never ever speaking. The only time anyone heard him speak was at the last game he played in an Expos uniform when he took a microphone onto the field and simply stated...

"Merci Beaucoups"

Everything had to epic like that with this guy.

Happy trails Vladdy, it is too bad that you didn't get a send off. If anyone deserved one it was you.



Like the seasons, love will come and go
If it's right, you'll automatically know
The world of mystery exists only in your head
When you become one with yourself
The wall will fall

There's a power deep inside you, an inner strength
You'll find in time of need.

You had the power. You had the glow, bro. 

You were the Expos' Last Dragon...

Why the Scientific Community is Concerned about Climate Change...

...and why you shouldn't hate on them.

Recently, it appears that a few tabloid articles from tabloid news agencies (Daily Mail (UK) was the first I believe to run it), have claimed to prove that climate change is a hoax.

I do not personally 100% agree with the articles of late that claim to have proven climate change to be a scam..but...there's some factors of it that I do agree with. I hate the climate change apocalyptic prognosticators as much as anyone, I think Al Gore is a sheister/buffoon, and I do not believe we will see immediate disastrous effects out of our backyard windows in the next few years.

Yet, that is not to say that because the apocalyptic prognostication faction has been slow to show us any awesome apocalypses, we can officially demote climate science to junk science.

The following are the reasons I believe climate change is occurring and why it can be very dangerous.

1. Humans evolved with their environments in a similar fashion throughout the entire planet. Humans are far and foremost a coastal sea-faring species. The percentage of humans still living in coastal regions vary from source to source yet a general estimate of 40-50% seems like the mean figure.

http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/es/papers/Coastal_Zone_Pop_Method.pdf

2. A 2006 study carried out by Church and White found that global sea levels are rising. They have concluded that sea levels have risen at a steady rate and will keep rising. Any proceeding study into sea levels supported the results of this study.

http://naturescapebroward.com/NaturalResources/ClimateChange/Documents/GRL_Church_White_2006_024826.pdf

So...if half of the humans on earth live on the coast and global sea levels are rising, could all these cities eventually be submerged? The answer is yes but it will not be tomorrow or next month. This is a gradual process. The cities can be submerged in 2100, 2300, 2500, 3100...we don't know. The possibility of this coastal submerging occurring is definite yet due to the time frame, me and you won't have to worry about it. Your great great grandchildren? Yes, probably.

3. Global sea/ocean temperatures are going up at an incredible rate. As water heats it expands (through convection) causing the density of the liquid to drop but the mass to increase. This only explains a portion of why water levels are rising. The other factor is that glaciers, ice shelves, and other blocks of solid liquid are also losing density and increasing in overall mass (melting).

The ant-arctic ice is staying stagnant and even growing (to the glee of climate change opponents) yet we have lost millions of square kilometers of ice in the opposite pole. Millions of square kilometers of ice in the north pole is becoming liquid.

(See: https://climate.nasa.gov/)

That's how they derive their statistics.

4. Why are global waters getting hotter? Why are they melting ice? What is causing this? Some speculate that it is only natural. Others speculate that a dense covering of gas is trapping heat within the planet, the oceans then absorb this heat and convect. The proof they cite is that they have measured the acidity of the water and it is increasing at a gradual rate as well.

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F

This is the theory which gets everyone excited and worried because it is the one that links human-made pollution to the rising temperature of global waters.

2 Things to Remember...

Firstly, Tabloids are not very educational. Sadly, all news outlets are of the tabloid variety because it is the only profitable method to sell news. The definition of "tabloid" is as follows (as per wikipedia):

"Tabloid journalism tends to emphasize topics such as sensational crime stories, astrology, gossip columns about the personal lives of celebrities and sports stars, and junk food news. Such journalism is commonly associated with tabloid sized newspapers like the National Enquirer, Globe, [Fox], or the The Sun and the former News of the World."

This is not the place to get your understanding of the world and how it operates. This style of journalism is designed to run stories that make readers mad/happy/sad (i.e. generate some sort of immediate emotional response) it is not designed to be educational. The Daily Mail (UK) column this story initially surfaced from is a tabloid...nothing more and nothing less.

If you would like to verse yourself in scientific journals and have a broader opinion on the matters at hand then by all means do so. Getting your info from scientific journals is going to give you far more credible information than a tabloid source.

Secondly, scientists understand the sands of human time in the scope of the god damned universe. Here to try and explain it is my home-slice, the deceased but still awesome Carl Sagan, and he's rappin' 'bout how short human history has been:

He's trying to explain it with calendar-esque day/hour/minute/second metrics that most of us are used to judging time in. We've only been here but for a moment, we really have. To the cosmos billions of years is nothing. Things take a long time, forces such as the erosion of rocks, the forming of continents, or the evolution of species are forces that alter the planet very GRADUALLY. You have to understand that it's not a bang-bang one-two punch. It takes a long time.

Yes, the average human only lives for about 75 years but your life is just one moment in the grand scheme of human existence. Theoretically, we can carry on the human game we're playing for billions of years right to the end (when the sun peters out), we can carry on the human game for a coupla hundred more years (by killing ourselves)...or we could even possibly harness technology, save ourselves, and fly out to settle other space rocks heated by other damned suns and play the human game infinitely.

The sensational tabloids will report the matter on either polarized perspective of climate change as if it will or will not kill us right now. People who are interested in science don't tend to think of the right now all the time, they know gradual processes take immense amounts of time.

Nuclear war will kill us all right-here-right-now and it is the only immediate apocalyptic event...but the destruction of our life-support system on earth through natural forces and/or man made pollution is a gradual process that may take thousands or hundreds of years.

Conclusion

Yes, climate change is occurring. No, it is not a hoax (my opinion anyway). Should we worry about it? Not in the immediate future.

In the case that you are a future-thinking dude/chick and wonder what the lives your great great great ancestors will be like....then yeah, you should worry.


Note (added Sept. 25/2013): I mentioned nuclear war as being the only event that will instantaneously assure our mutual destruction but I was not correct with that statement. There are many ways we can go extinct from natural causes. A good read on the subject of how we may all die is the 5th section of Neil DeGrasse Tyson's excellent book..."Death by Black Hole and other cosmic quandaries."