After thirty years of thumb-sucking, nose picking, and other inactivity by the GOP about human-caused Climate Change. After more than 30 years of conservative politicians sucking their thumbs when asked about human-caused Climate Change, it is finally real. Scientific American magazines explains how to tell the difference between a real or a false conspiracy. You know what a skyscraper is. Yet what about a groundscaper? I know the Frankfurt one (pictured) due to its excellent and soundproof Hilton Hotel. Every see a CAT scanner with its cover off? You’ll realize why it’s covered. Did dinosaurs walk up walls 68 million years ago? It might appear so in this 300-foot high wall in Bolivia, long before tectonic pressure turned a muddy plain into a vertical wall. Bali won’t be accepting tourists until 2021. Think you know how to sit while driving? Guess again. Jaguar Land Rover Chief Medical Officer Dr. Steve Iley shows you how in a two-minute video. This graphic, showing the relative scale of small things just at the limit or slightly beyond human site, shows the remarkable size of a human white blood cell. Here is a video of a new Amtrak Avelia train (disguised with Acela markings) test-running empty between Providence and New York City. Amtrak has order 36 of these ($2.4 billion) to run between Boston, Massachusetts, and Washington, D,C, starting in 2021. These new trains, like the Acelas, are manufactured by the French company Alstrom, with final assembly in upstate New York. Each Avelia carries 25% more passengers than current Amtrak Acela trains, has high safety and crash standards (as well as WiFi, USB and power plugs at each seat, etc.), and is 30% lighter (more miles to the kilowatt) than the Acelas. Although capable of cruising at 185 mph (300 kph), they are currently being test run at up to 165 mph (265 kph), a speed which they can reach only on the long straight section of track between Boston and Providence, Rhode Island. Unfortunately, the winding, century-old rail lines between Boston and Washington, D.C. would have to be completely rebuilt to permit true highspeed train service. The original Acela trains, which began carrying passengers on these routes back in the year 2000, will be retired. #
If Americans don’t need to show a photo Identity card to exercise their other Constitutionally guaranteed rights, they should not be required to produce such an ID to exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed right to vote. Voter fraud has proven to be so minuscule a problem in the U.S., literally as rare as being struck by lightning in the polling booth line.
In the political battle between U.S. liberals and progressives versus U.S. conservatives and reactionaries, the dictionary and history books provide judgement.
Finally unveiled: the ‘Deep State’ plot by the press, who are against Trump!
The rise of ‘right-wing’ politicians in post-industrial countries — politicians such as Donald Trump of the United States of America, Marie Le Pen of France, the late Jörg Haider and his successors in Austria, and others, and similar movements, such as the Tea Party movement in the U.S. — are only the beginning of what will probably be a 20 to 50 years of reactionary protests as major countries (indeed, all countries eventually) now transition from the Industrial Era into the Informational Era. The 2020’s will likely be a particularly tumultuous decade. The Informational Era denotes a period in human history when most economies are based upon performing services rather than manufacturing products. The U.S. have now entered that period and become ‘post-industrial’. Part of that transition has involved low-skilled manufacturing and industrial jobs (such as manufacturing thread or clothing, electronic devices, or simple furnitures and supplies) migrating to other countries where lower wages are paid. That part of the transition has been occuring during the past 40 to 50 years. However, another major and often overlooked part of this transition from Industrial to Informational involves robotics. For examples, very many manufacturing jobs in the U.S. have been replaced by robotics. An industrial robot controlled by someone who has a master’s degree in engineering can replace anywhere from several to a dozen or more manual laborers. These machines pay for themselves in only a few years. This revolution in robotic has transformed manufacturing in many countries. Hundreds of thousands, perhaps more than a million, industrial jobs in the U.S. have been lost due to robotics replacing workers, yet industrial manufacturing output in the U.S. has risen to record levels, exceeding output during the Industrial Era. Another reason why this new era is being called Informational is that technology has developed machines that can now use information (i.e, their programming) to create actual products in ways light years beyond what the simple Industrial Era mechanical loom could do. Moreover, that robotics revolution has begun to invade those countries were industrial jobs have migrated due to low wages. Earlier this year, the South China Morning Post of Hong Kong reported that one factory in China’s Jiangsu province used robots to replace 60,000 workers, and that 600 other companies in that province were drafting similar restructuring plans. In Taiwan, Foxconn, which manufacturers computer products for Apple, has spent a total of $500 million on robotics, […]
“But, Vin, you’re a Progressive,” retorted a Libertarian friend during a political discussion. I was taken aback by his characterization of me! ‘Progressive?’ I’d never thought of myself as that. What did it mean? I’d remembered the term as from the United States history. During the late 19th and early 20th Centuries a progressive was someone who advocated legislation eliminating tenement housing, preventing child labor, and ensuring food safety. There was a Progressive Party founded in 1912 by former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. Yet my experience has been that whenever someone tries to label you, they’ve already pre-packaged their view of the world. Few people are actually what other people label them. They’re instead more complex. Even people who label themselves, when asked questions that closely examine their values, will admit gaps, some opposite opinions, and plenty of nuances beliefs. I realized that my Libertarian friend in 21st Century meant was not only trying to pigeonhole my beliefs, he was intentionally, inadvertently, or ignorantly trying to gloss over any complexities or nuances of our discussions. He wanted to believe I was either someone who just wants for the sake of change or someone who thinks that government can solve all problems. Neither of which is true. However, the more I thought about he mischaracterized me, the more I realized there is another and newer meaning of Progressive that is unrelated to all those political old labels and characterizations. A meaning with which I agree and do identify. Allow me to explain. During the nearly 60 years I’ve lived, I’ve seen the world change. The end of the Cold War, globalization, diversification, interwoven economies, international pollution and climate change, growing scarcity of resources, and decreasing scarcity of information are only some of those changes. The pace of change in all those things constantly accelerates. Yet so many of our institutions, laws, practices, and lifestyles haven’t or aren’t adapting to these obvious changes in the world. As the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus noted, change is the nature of things. Unfortunately, people fear or dislike change. So, it is human nature that our institutions, laws, practices, and lifestyles can become perilously out-of-date, particularly as the pace of change has accelerated. No, not everything should change (fundamental human rights, for example). However, the list of things that need not change is remarkably small, as indeed any list of truly precious things will be. There are remarkably […]
Most of the world’s most controversial subjects tend to polarize people’s opinions: people not only disagree about the subject, but do so by being either completely for or against the subject. Generating electricity from nuclear power is one of these subjects. Too bad, because it’s people’s polarization itself that prevents a solution. Yes, nuclear power is environmentally clean and therefore nuclear power should be used. Yes, nuclear accidents will happen and therefore nuclear power shouldn’t be used. However, the reality of the subject isn’t at all that polar. Among the people who know that is the board of editors of Scientific American magazine. They include people who not only understand both sides of the issues, but realize that the ultimate problem about nuclear power generation isn’t nuclear power but the cases of duplicity, corruption, and incompetence about it. Here is their editorial about it, which appeared in the June issue of their magazine. I applauded the editorial when I first read it earlier this summer: “…If we gave it up, what would replace it? Pollution from fossil-fueled power plants shortens the life span of as many as 30,000 Americans a year. Coal companies lop off mountaintops, hydraulic fracturing for natural gas threatens water supplies, and oil dependence undermines the nation’s energy security. Then there is the small matter of greenhouse gas emissions. Clean renewable technologies will take years to reach the scale needed to replace the power we get from splitting atoms…. “…The industry and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) claim that nuclear power is safe, but their lack of transparency does not inspire confidence. For example, an Associated Press investigation in March revealed 24 cases from December 2009 to September 2010 in which plant operators did not report equipment defects to the NRC…. “…The trouble is that regulations are not being enforced rigorously. The NRC has to mete out stiff penalties for violations and make every action transparent to us all…. “…If exercises showed that residents around a plant could not leave quickly enough, the NRC should consider shutting it down. A good test case is the Indian Point plant 38 miles north of New York City. Evacuating the 20 million people who live within 50 miles staggers belief…. “…If an operator proposes a site that is too close to an earthquake fault, or too close to oceanfront that is vulnerable to a tsunami or hurricane storm surge, or downriver from a huge […]
The Economist today reports that polling by the Pew Research Center showed that al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Lauden had lost popular support in Islamic countries years before a US Navy counter-terrorism team took his life. “This may reflect a genuine change in attitudes after al-Qaeda’s high-profile attacks in places such as Bali and Jordan, as well as its violence in Iraq. But it could also reflect Mr bin Laden’s lower profile in recent years.”
I’m thinking of raising capital for a new venture—Tea Party Land. This amusement park located in Middle America will have little or no government, ban admission to immigrants, and comprise Hannity Town, Old Testament Ingrahamstan , Beck Fantasyland, Coultershire, and O’Reillytopia. All its streets will lead to Fox Castle where every hour on the hour Princess Palin appears from a balcony. Tea Party Land will be the first family amusement park to feature rides engineered according to Creation Science and Supply-Side Economics: such as the Holy Rollercoaster down the mighty Limbaughorn, the Trickledown Waterslide (is your mortgage underwater?), and It’s A Cool Cool Cooling World. What other rides, cuisines, and features should we include? (Photograph, Tea Cup Ride on High Street, Solihull, courtesy of Ell Brown on Flickr.)
I’m bemused that the controversy about plans to open an Islamic community center in lower Manhattan is occuring in the same year that Miss USA is a Muslim, Rimi Fakih.
The historical theme for this century is Tribalism versus World Law.
Since George Washington was sworn in as president of the United States, 42 men have held that office. I lived through the criminal administration of Richard Nixon, but I had thought the odds were good that I wouldn’t live during a incompetent president (Nixon’s unelected successor, Gerald Ford, although prone to tripping over his own feet, was a competent administrator). When I think about incompetent U.S. presidents, I think about Andrew Johnson, Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover, or other names from past generations. I’ve however realized that I am living through the administration of who may be the most incompetent president in U.S. history. Andrew Johnson’s administration (1865-69) may have been a nadir, but the U.S. wasn’t the world’s only superpower at that time. The incompetent George W. Bush‘s United States is. Six years into it, I cannot name anything he has competently done. Quite the contrary. Almost five years since the terrorist attack on New York City, the site of the destroyed World Trade Towers is still an empty lot and no one directly involved with those attacks has subsequently been captured, prosecuted, or convicted. Bush quite rightly led the United States to invade Afghanistan after that country’s government refused to prosecute or extradite the people (notably Osama bin Lauden) who openly claimed to the masterminds of the New York and Washington terrorist attacks. The U.S. military conquered most of Afghanistan (the first time anyone had successfully done that since Alexander the Great), but refused (reputably at the White House’s insistence) to send its troops into the Tora Bora Mountains where those masterminds were hiding. Osama bin Lauden and the other masterminds apparently escaped into neighboring Pakistan. No one publicly knows if Bush demanded his extradition. Moreover, widespread evidence arose that the chief of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb project had been providing bomb plans and materials to North Korea, Iran, and Libya (the latter country’s dictator admitted this and turned the plans and materials over to the U.S. government). Yet Bush didn’t flinch when Pakistan’s own dictator pardoned the bomber and continued to shelter the September 11th masterminds. Bush this past week visited Pakistan and called it an “unwavering ally.” With allies like that, we’re in big trouble. Bush then proclaimed a doctrine of ‘pre-emptive war’ and invaded Iraq because, according to the White House, there was ‘slam-dunk’ proof that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was building weapons of mass destruction. The […]