May 15, 2008
There is a movement afoot to require the Government to declare the Polar bear an endangered species, not just a “threatened” species. I read that there are an estimated 20,000 of them roaming the far north. The endangered tag is important because then it would require the Government to take affirmative action to protect there habitat–the ice floes and sheets of the polar regions. Thus you get to the global warming controversy which is the real issue behind the movement to save the Polar bears from their alleged extinction due to global warming.
I like seeing polar bears. I have nothing against them and it would be nice if they remain part of our global ecosystem for years. I sometimes get amused though at those who have the arrogance to believe they can control Mother Nature with micro-management techniques. I assume the majority of those proposing this step are college educated and certainly accept the basic tenets of Darwinian theory regarding the evolution of the species. I believe in those basic tenets myself. How many species have become extinct over the eons? Do some believe we have reached the perfect point in time that all species now living have some inherent right to exist for ever? More importantly does Mother Nature agree with that proposition. I mean literally countless numbers of species have come and gone over the years for various reasons that had nothing to do with us. Isn’t it rather foolish and foolhardy to believe that process will stop now. Why do such intelligent people hit a brick wall with their thinking when faced with this fact of evolutionary theory. Things change and will continue to do so.
Remember that the earth was once completely covered in water for millions of years; for another epoch it was a giant snowball; for millions of years the atmosphere was so polluted with methane that only minimal life of any kind existed. Yes, I love clean air and water and want it for myself and my kids but I want a realistic approach to environmental concerns. Overpopulation is the culprit; a tough topic to discuss. Let’s not abandon our homo sapiens heritage on the critical issues of our age. Think is all I ask. The Polar bears have no “right” to exist any more than any other species that has been terminated by the plan or caprice of Mother Nature.
I have always had one huge question about evolutionary theory that no one has ever been able to answer to my satisfaction. A major thrust of the theory is that traits that are useful to survival will endure over long periods of time and contrarily that the traits that are harmful will be weeded out by the slow process of mutation by succeeding generations. What is more useful to man’s survival than the ability to see? Why do so many of us have to wear glasses. Obviously that is not a medical question but an evolutionary one. You would think that over the thousands of generations of homo sapiens that sight would have slowly but surely improved to the point where we at least didn’t need the spectacles. Ponder that.
May 13, 2008
There have been many articles and news accounts in recent days regarding the 60th anniversary of Israel as a nation and it is a good time to take a hard look at the relationship of the US with Israel. It is self evident that the US has been the staunchest ally of Israel since its founding in 1948. The fact that there was an immediate conflict with neighboring Arabs and indigenous ones came as no surprise to anyone at the time because that simmering pot of contention had been brewing already for decades. As far back as WWI there were many divergent opinions about granting an independent state to Israel at the expense of the Arabs. Winston Churchill was one of the chief proponents of taking such a course of action right after the war. Since 1948 there have been many periods of truce but no real peace in the area.
The US like all nation states has its strategic interests and its self interests to protect and there is nothing evil or wrong with that. Has our historic support of Israel strengthened or damaged those self interests and strategic goals? It is in our interest for there to be stability and peace in that region of the world as it is for most areas of the world but not all areas quite candidly. For example does it really harm out interests if Bolivia and Paraguay went to war with each other? Or say Chad and Mali? Have we obtained the peace and stability in the mid east with the creation and continued existence of Israel? Just because there has been no stability in the area doesn’t mean it is the fault of Israel but lack of fault is not much solace compared to the agony of dealing with the constant turmoil in the area that far pre -dates our current conflict in Iraq.
Have we made money from our dealings with Israel? That is an easy one. They have received more aid than anyone else from us for decades and we also have made aid payments to neighboring states not because it benefited our economic interest but because it was used to make us appear more even handed in the area, i.e. Egypt. Add to the direct aid the cost of our military to protect them (and make no mistake that part of the Fifth Fleet’s job in the Mediterranean is to protect Israel) and the money transferred to Jewish charities from the US and the lost interest on such monies and what we have spent in Iraq pales. It has been a very expensive proposition to support Israel. We need a return on our money it seems to me and a return on our loyalty and supportive actions. Both parties for obvious political reasons have for decades refused to touch the relationship with Israel, it is another of those famous “third rails” of American politics like social security. Israel you will recall has on more than one occasion repaid us by using their spies to obtain our military secrets for their own use.
The Palestinian - Israeli conflict is the festering wound in the side of the middle east. The brunt of Iranian complaints against the US relates to our support for Israel. Some recent comments of famous politicians about using nukes on Iran were in response to what the US should do if Israel, not the US, was attacked by Iran. This is NOT an anti-semitic essay, far from it. I have no love lost for Arab terrorists or their ilk. But I believe it is finally time to think really anew about our relationship with Israel and be very forceful in pushing for a long term and binding resolution in that area. It will never be easy to do and wont get any easier with the status quo. We have done our share and then some to protect Israel. They want the continued funding and even demand it but there should be an explicit price for it in the future–peace with the Palestinians on whatever terms they want to work out. Yes, Israel has a right to exist but like all nations that existence has it costs. We need to look to our own interests unabashedly. It is time.
Give this some thought yourself. You may disagree with some of my vagaries of the mind but hopefully you will agree a different tack is due for all our sakes. As an encouragement I would point out that even the Hundred Years War did come to an end.
May 13, 2008
Every election cycle its seems some voices are raised about alleged inadequacies of the Electoral College system set out in the Constitution. I heard an editorial this morning in fact extolling the virtues of a popular vote method being bandied about by a few states and interest groups to require the Electors of each state to vote in favor of the person winning the popular vote on a nation -wide basis. I believe the Electoral System has served us exceedingly well over the last couple of centuries and should be maintained as is.
I know the Electoral College is a bit cumbersome and can produce close elections and on the contrary sometimes produces landslides even though the popular vote might be very close. It was designed that way. All aspects of democratic rule in a Federal Republic are messy, cumbersome and even frustrating at times. Hey, Hitler’s Germany was run very efficiently and they didn’t have to mess with any electoral system there after he gained full power. The purpose of the Electoral System is to recognize the importance of the states and the role they play in a our Federal method of government. That federal system has already been eroded enough over the last 75 years and we don’t need it diminished further. The individual states of our union should be the repository of great power and influence. The current election method gives them significant say in the affairs and selection of our chief magistrate. A selection by simple popular vote takes away all influence from the states and that is not to the good. It allows the passions of the moment to thwart a wiser long term course for the Republic; a long term course of action is certainly what we need at the National level.
Some small states may claim they have no say in the outcome of an election for President but that is simply not so. First they can band together for mutual support and objective and coordinate their votes as they see fit for President and they may also form confederations with other large states if they desire it. The chess game of politics is good for us not bad. We have had some great Presidents, fair ones and some not so good, but they didn’t get there by the fault of the Electoral System. On a popular vote basis we might well have had President Aaron Burr rather than Thomas Jefferson. (Yes, I know that one went to the Congress for resolution but it might not have made it there if just popular votes were counted). You do recall Burr’s trial a couple of years later for attempting to split the Union west of the Ohio and Mississippi.
You think about it. Do you really want just one tiny vote out of say 60 million or a vote in your own state.
Keep the power as close to the people as you can in all circumstances. Princes at a far distance do not hear the people very well. Washington it far.
One modern complication is the current lack of control on illegal immigration and the likely abuse and turmoil it will create in our future elections by allowing certain states such as California or Texas to have greater sway than they would if the immigration laws were now and had been enforced. Simply converting illegals into citizens will boost the Electoral College votes of those states at the expense of others and allows a serious erosion of American culture and “viewpoint” in the election process for President. This potential problem is correctable if we only assert our will. I have no issue with some states having larger populations than others and thus more electoral votes as long as their citizens played by the same rules as the rest of us.
Know how they put the eye in the needle? Ever thought what an amazing invention that was and how it revolutionized the garment industry. If you pay attention and come back I will let you know more about it.
Hug your kids and kiss your wife.
May 13, 2008
If you traveled back to pre War Between the States days in any part of the good old US, you would set your pocket watch to the local time where you were. There were no time zones here or anywhere else in the world. Time was pretty much set by the local towns around the world. Almost any town of size would have a bell tower with a clock and everyone in the neighborhood would set their time pieces to it. Days of the week and months of course were observed uniformly throughout the civilized world. But for commerce and communications you were limited to those broad times and used local time strictly for local events.
In those days of a slower pace where mail went by coach, riverboat or ship it didn’t much matter what time of the day it was in New York if you lived on the banks of the Mississippi. We have already discussed before how time was so important for navigation on the seas and that substantial awards were even offered for someone who could invent an accurate enough clock to help measure longitude on the oceans of the world. After all time is the way to measure both distance and speed. But sailing ships still moved pretty slowly and even the early steam ships still were ponderous. When you reached port you would set your pocket watch again to the local time whatever it was.
Then came the railroads and the telegraph. Now everything was faster. The early trains mostly ran on single tracks with sidings along the way. It wouldn’t do to have trains banging into each other so there was a vital need that the train companies have a uniform time they could all agree on. When the train from Buffalo was on its way to Chicago it had to know for sure when the train from Chicago going the other way would be coming down the same track. Of course there was the obvious business need to deliver goods on time to their destination so they could be transshipped even farther. It was in the mid 19th century that we (the railroads) started making time uniform throughout the country and the general population adopted and started using the same time standards. This lead to the use of the modern time zones to further refine the timekeeping method to organize schedules when going east to west or vice versa.
When you see a sign on the highway as you leave town and it says that it is 30 miles to the next place, have you ever thought about what the standard was that they used to measure those distances? I mean some places are pretty big. From one end of Dallas to the other is about 20 miles and the same with Ft. Worth. So what do we use to state the distance because it could obviously vary by many miles?
The railroads again. For the same reasons as the need for uniform time they needed standards to determine speed and time of arrival, departures, etc. So they set the standard as city hall to city hall unless the city happened to be the county seat of government in which case the county courthouse was used as the beginning or ending point for measurements.
The early work of the railroads have a daily effect on your life that you never noticed.
May 7, 2008
Pay attention to the news articles and see how often you read something like–”and the Federal government will provide matching funds for the program”. In fact so often the Feds are providing the bulk of the money for lots of projects for schools, roads, parks, health care programs, welfare–you name it. Is this a good thing? I don’t think so, not at all. Why are we letting the Federal government have so much of our money in the first place and then jumping up and down like happy little puppy dogs when they graciously allow us to have some of it back.
There was a huge sea change toward the view of Federal government during FDR’s administration. Most folks these days are so unaware of it. Please take just 10 minutes and read your copy of the Constitution again. It sets out the business of the US govt. and in the 10th amendment leaves everything else to the people and the States. During the Depression the Federal role in our lives was expanded exponentially and not all for the good if you view today’s political landscape. Remember that FDR went so far as to try and pack the Supreme Court with 12 members because he was outraged they wouldn’t let him expand as far as he wanted. Power never operates in a vacuum and the power stripped from the States went directly to the Feds. That power was mostly wielded with money. Why is the Federal government controlling research at our local State universities? Like Stem cell. Because it controls the money. There is no law banning stem cell research just a prohibition against Federal money being used which puts the brakes on it. Frankly, I have questions about the stem cell research myself but that is not the point, the point is we should have more say in all our affairs at the local level where our voices can be heard most directly.
No kid left behind. I am all for a good education for as many as can absorb one. But what the hell business is it of the Feds? They act like they are doing us a big favor granting that money and we have become addicted to those dollops of Federal beneficience. It is our money, not theirs. We should decide how we want our kids educated at the State level. It is none of the Feds business. We must start taking the initiative to reclaim our rights and demand the Federal government not take so much of our money in the first place. Let the States use those billions for innovation, creation and experimenting with the best way to meet the needs of the people.
Health care? I really like the idea that Mass. came up with a health care plan. I don’t know all the details of how it works but that doesn’t matter. What matters is that they are trying. I wish a few more States would come up with their own version and see which one works best. That is what a Federal system is supposed to do. We were not set up to be dominated by Washington but to be partners with Washington.
There are those who would love to eliminate all State government, it just gets in the way. They want everything to be done on a National level and guess who they want to control it all. Be very aware of that approach this election.
We need to talk more about how and why a Federal system works and why it really is such a ingenious method of governing; not only that but the people have more power over the politicians. Why are some politicians so afraid of the people? Why do they think we are so clueless and they are from the Federal government and here to help us–like the old joke.
Don’t forget Mom,,,it is almost Mother’s Day.
Thought for the day–how exactly do those leaves convert CO2 to oxygen with a little help from sunlight and aren’t you glad it works. How much of our atmosphere is oxygen? Less than you probably guessed. Look it up.
May 6, 2008
There are lots of words these days about illegal immigration from all quarters. Why not try to shed some intelligent light on the subject and not just heat. Let’s start with some basics. Every Nation or State is deemed sovereign and that means to rule over a specific geographic region. Without that fundamental there is no such thing as a sovereign nation. In turn that means to control its own borders. This is not a new concept it goes back to Classical times and has endured ever since. So there is nothing novel or inherently evil about any Nation controlling access to its borders.
The fact that we have to spend money on illegal aliens is without question. For example in Texas the annual budget for schools is about 40 billion and the estimated 10% illegal enrollment translates into 4 billion to educate foreigners. Make no mistake they are foreigners, not Americans. That is just one cost. Medical costs at the major hospitals in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio etc are likewise enormous. The list goes on and is fairly easy to quantify. Some say that those costs are all offset by the contributions the illegals make to our economy. I personally find that much harder to quantify. Seems mostly guess work to me. Please do your own analysis. Likewise I find it appalling that so many of them use idenitity fraud to obtain their work. How would you like to wake up one morning and have the IRS say you are not you and all the credit card companies saying you owe charges you know nothing about. I hate taking the word of some “independent research group” or foundation. My years of experience has taught me that they invariably have an “agenda” they want to promote. Give it some thought I trust you more than I do them.
Would our economy collapse if they all disappeared tomorrow? I don’t think so. And if there are all that many jobs going begging we should and could assign them out to our own citizens who need to work and have the dignity of a job. If they don’t want the work maybe we should consider the welfare programs anew. Why should someone get food stamps, direct subsidies or earned tax credits if work is truly there? We are all better off if our own citizens have employment. Can’t imagine anyone who would disagree with that idea.
More importantly are we undermining our culture heritage by allowing such a huge influx of illegals? Culture comes from the Greek, meaning worship. Over the centuries it came to mean a collective devotion to a particular set of aesthetic and intellectual values for specific peoples regarding society and its functioning.
Do we really want our culture to resemble that of Mexico? You been there? Take a hard look at it. I don’t think you want their ideas and views to be the dominant precepts of American life. You don’t like our cops and law enforcement? Do you believe having a police force like Mexico would be to your liking?
What to do? Well, let’s talk about that more, lots more. Don’t take any of this to mean we should throw babies over the border or put momma and poppa in a concentration camp. That would be misconstruing these thoughts. Let’s ponder this together more.
How would YOUR life change if they were all gone tomorrow? That is a serious question, think it through.
Generally speaking women are generally speaking. Not an original thought with me. Blame it on my elementary school principal. That is where I first heard that little ditty. By the way he had a PHD. which was not unusual in those ancient days and most principals were men. We were expected to do as we were told and we did. There wasn’t some appeal process, the principal’s word was law and the final word.
Intelligent dialogue and even disagreement makes us stronger.
May 2, 2008
I am sure that name rings a bell with most of you–well, maybe one or two of you anyway. He was a Greek geographer from the third century B.C. He calculated pretty darn accurately the circumference of the earth with the most simple devices and geometric theories. Theories you studied in your geometry class.
He lived in Alexandria and learned that the noon day sun at certain times cast no shadow in Aswan which was upriver on the Nile. That would be south for those geographically challenged. Yet the sun always cast a shadow at Alexandria even at high noon. You know why it cast a shadow there of course. Alexandria is farther north in latitude and the sun will always cast a shadow because of the “tilt” of the earth in the more northern latitudes relative to the Sun. So he designed a simple experiment. He chose an exact date when the sun would cast no shadow in Aswan and at the same noon time he measured the degree of the shadow cast by it in Alexandria. The shadow cast was 7 degrees and 14 mins. as we would say in modern jargon.
He knew the earth was a globe and therefore had 360 degrees in circumference so what did he do? First he had to calculate the distance from Alexandria to Aswan. Here was his one “error”. The tools and devices at hand at that time were not nearly as accurate as ours today. He had no GPS or even surveyor telescopes or a precise measuring device like a yard stick that could accurately measure the distance. But he used what was available and estimated the distance from traveler’s tales about the distance and translated that distance into the then known Greek distances of stadia (about 607 modern English feet) which he estimated to be about 5000 stadia.
What was the next step? Well, the 7.14 was one fiftieth of a full circumference so he did the multiplication and came out to about 28,000 miles (250,000 stadia). That was too high by a bit but pretty damned accurate considering his tools at hand and his theory and method were dead on.
Don’t shortchange your ancestors. On the whole they were pretty clever fellows and had intellectual skills equivalent to ours. What would a man like that have done with a Mac?
Reach down your hand to help someone up who deserves it. You won’t just be pulling them up, you’ll be lifting yourself.
May 2, 2008
The moniker Antipodes always sounds so exotic to me; that land “down under” of New Zealand and Australia. Even when all educated people realized that the earth was not indeed flat but a sphere there still persisted many strange notions of the globe from our modern perspective. Remember that the sciences of geology and history did not exist a few centuries ago. The world was still filled with notions of monsters in the far reaches of the earth, beyond the discovered and known lands. So many places still existed as more myth than fact. It was believed that those nether worlds were inhabited by monsters.
Monster is from the Greek and means to warn. Those monsters were mostly an offshoot of religious dogma that all men were descended from Adam and the monsters were the descendents of Cain and Ham. So the word monster was pretty apt from the perspective of 500 hundred years ago. Those monsters inhabited those remote corners of the globe and warned us that perhaps we shouldn’t venture there. Maybe they even warned us about those dark angels that sought our souls.
Antipodes means opposite footed and the monsters down under were believed by some to have to walk upside down to stay on the earth even after the idea of a sphere was accepted. After all Newton had not yet advanced his theories of gravity. It was not completely illogical to imagine people having to walk upside down to stay on the earth, after all they were on the “bottom” of it.
It wasn’t until the 18th century that Cook and Bligh truly opened up that region to science and an understanding of that faraway world.
Read a biography of Cook, you will be fascinated I guarantee. For that era it was as exotic as us sending a man to the moon. Also read about the Bounty and the survivors and the British response to that mutiny. That is filled with lessons for great powers today.
Freud was studying history when he developed his theories. Psyche is from the Greek, it means “soul” and the history of each individual was the way to know his soul and rid it of its demons. That is a simplification but pretty accurate I believe. Freud was enamored with a study of the Classics and history. That fascination lead his medical training to the course we have all come to know as psychoanalysis.
Call a old friend. Be grateful. If you are reading this at all you have been blessed beyond your worth.
April 29, 2008
You should read a good basic survey book on astronomy if you want to have a deeper understanding of your religious views, whatever they are or are not. Carl Sagan’s Cosmos is a good starter but there are many others. When you contemplate the real universe it will imbue you with a sense of wonder at it all if you are a thinking person. For me it profoundly makes be believe in the divine. That belief is not merely based on faith but cold blooded analysis of the world around me.
Start with the basic proposition that “Mother Nature” does not gives a tinker’s toot if we exist or not. She doesn’t need planet earth or for it to have the environment that it has to harbor life. It does require a certain mix of elements and alignments for life to exist anywhere in the universe. After you have read some and have a basic understanding of our universe, you will realize how incredible it is that our speck in space is so life friendly. I mean the temperature is just right for life. Realize that if the atmosphere was a bit different we would either freeze to death or literally be roasted alive. Also, if the atmosphere of earth didn’t have the right mix of elements we would be fried by gamma rays or other forms of radiation from our own Sun. Even the magnetic field protects us, we would die without it.
The moon? Yes, it controls our tides our weather patterns and even the levels of the seas. If it was closer or farther away than it is, I would not be writing these words for no man would be walking the earth. You think it was an accident that the moon is the perfect distance so that the solar eclipses are so perfect that the moon’s exactly covers the face of the Sun? Even the tilt of the earth is right for life and gives us our seasons for growing and a mostly balmy clime. Ask a professional astronomer how many other planets there are like ours. Out of the literally trillions of objects in the universe we are blessed unique. Physics, chemistry, Mother Nature didn’t make this “for” us, but we sure are the beneficiaries of the bounty.
There is much more about this topic we need to discuss anon for it reveals who we are and maybe even why we are.
Do you really know why we only see one side of the moon? I have to always think very carefully and use a coin and an apple to visualize why myself. Why do the moon phases move from right to left as we view them?
So much to learn and explore and so little time. Call a brother or sister just to say you love them. Remember you ancestors.
April 29, 2008
I recently read an article that echoed a belief that I have held for a number of years–that everyone is not college material. Such a notion runs counter to our current ever so politically correct ideas that ever single child should be prepared for a college education and in fact receive one. The real facts are that is a false assumption. The numbers and common sense speak for themselves to anyone who will only take a look.
First one should notice how badly our academic courses and schools have been watered down to the lowest common denominator. Do you really believe the standards for school achievement are as stringent as they were historically? You think the typical liberal arts major in college today is meeting the same criteria of excellence and being exposed to the same standards as your grandfather? My mother- in- law never went beyond the 11th grade in the public school system but she studied Latin, geometry, and knew her grammar rules and could spell with the best of them. She was no genius but had received a rigorous education. All students were expected to rise up to the expectations of the curriculum not merely show up for class and be passed.
Often you hear how smart and well educated the people are in the industrialized world aboard compared to US students and they are. But the comparison is askew. In most of those countries the vast majority of students are done with formal education about age 16 and they move on to what we would call trade schools. Only a small portion attend university. We try to shoehorn everyone into the college path and make it a national goal. That is so wrong. I respect and admire any man who works for his daily bread regardless of the work. There is nothing demeaning about being a brick mason, steelworker, plumber, fireman, machine tool operator, car mechanic or roustabout in the oil fields. We need people who can do those jobs just like we need engineers, doctors and yes, sad to say even lawyers.
Thomas Jefferson was the father and founder of the movement to educate all the people and the idea of a public education. That was considered fairly radical at the time. He even laid out the design and format for the University of Virginia. But even he did not believe that everyone should or could attend college. Yes, for heaven’s sake we need an educated people. But why do we not better utilize our resources to help the most people get the education they need to make their life a better one for them. College should be demanding, not a flow- through for those ill equipped to handle those demands. How many students would be better off spending the last couple of years in high school studying practical applications for trades and industries that would use and need them?
Don’t demean the majority of our people by giving them the impression they have somehow failed if they didn’t attend college. We are a great people but we should also be a smart people. Let’s make those colleges degrees the mark of achievement they should be and revamp our education system to accommodate the needs of the people and our nation.
