Apparently, Saddam is dead.

More on the Grand Canyon thingie:

Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

"In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. "It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.'"

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.

In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To quiet the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told reporters and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy review of the issue.

According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or completed.

[link]

Grand Canyon FAQ at the National Park Service website: [link]

How old is the Canyon?

That's a tricky question. Although rocks exposed in the walls of the canyon are geologically quite old, the Canyon itself is a fairly young feature. The oldest rocks at the canyon bottom are close to 2000 million years old. The Canyon itself - an erosional feature - has formed only in the past five or six million years. Geologically speaking, Grand Canyon is very young.

Apparently, Saddam is dead.

Does this mean it was done before the start of Eid?

And quietly, for what it was.

The less quiet part starts tomorrow.

Am I callous to be glad that the less quiet part happens after he is already dead and gone? Because I don't know if I wanted to see that before the fact. I don't even know if I want to see it now actually.

Never mind -- I think we're thinking of different less quiets. I'm assuming we'll see a doubling and redoubling of the hostilities, which I don't want to see at any time. But I wasn't clear.

I wonder if it's up on YouTube yet? not really!

Never mind -- I think we're thinking of different less quiets. I'm assuming we'll see a doubling and redoubling of the hostilities, which I don't want to see at any time. But I wasn't clear.

I was thinking of celebrating his death. Which I don't think I want to see.

Not more hostility which I am quite clear on not wanting. Whether I see it or not.

Vaguery, it's not just for the internets. Because you will be having the wrong conversation and not know it at first.

I getcha, Cass - we were both all oblique and shit. Plus, I'm way too tired and generally icky-feeling tonight to make sense of news that makes me more tired and icky. I think that's a sign that it's time for sleep, and not for the discussing of world affairs.