Technology Has Changed The Way We View Our Surroundings!

Photo: Smartware.org

The world has undoubtedly changed over the course of the last 50 years with the technological development of the film industry.  Movies not have incorporated computer animation which extends the ability to take the viewer into a fantasy world for a few hours.  At the same time, other viewers -- namely, those who choose to watch documentaries or educational shows have also benefitted greatly from the advance in technology too.


Documentaries about the world around us are brought to the viewer in high definition.  Nature shows exhibit a viewing quality almost unmatched by the viewer who is present at the recording.  Two examples are shown below.  Both are taken from Twitter Posts.



The first Twitter post is from 'Science Channel' and shows the evolution of a bug being attacked and eventually swallowed by a nearby predator:

Jump, Jump... Jump Around! Jump up, Jump Up, and Get Down! 🐸 The American Green Tree Frog is a strong-legged insectivore native to the Southeast United States.#Science 🥼 #Frog pic.twitter.com/IliHW0MeUE

— Science Channel (@ScienceChannel) November 5, 2019

The second is from the Twitter account 'The Futurist' shows the projection of topographical colors over sandcastles to teach children about topography:

Watch this interactive, AR-integrated topography sandbox in action! 🗺️🤯#VirtualReality #AR #MR #VR #IoT #AI #ML #AugmentedReality #technology #MixedReality #maps #news #Science pic.twitter.com/IoMwgKWV7q

— The Futurist 🚀 (@TheFuturist007) November 6, 2019

Take the opportunity and search the internet for great illustrations of nature along with other scientific illustrations.  The internet is filled with examples.  Spending a small amount of weekly time searching/viewing could help bridge the gap between society and science.



Take part in bridging the gap.  Help us alleviate the disparity in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) career fields.  Every person can use a little update/education into the science which drives our world (and society).

Cheating Does Not Pay...Just Ask A Newly Banned Video Gamer

Photo by Florian Olivo on Unsplash

Kids (and people) seem to try to find short cuts through life.  As if, proceeding through the normal process just like everyone else is so dull.  And difficult for some.  Which is where cheating the system comes into the equation.  How can I find a way to circumvent the rules to make my journey more comfortable?  At the expense of another person(s) journey?  Even if cheating just hurts a single person, life is not worth cheating.



I am not a perfect person and have tried to cheat the system plenty of times. Throughout my life (I am not 47 years old), I can honestly say that treading down the path of life on the straight road is much more rewarding than spending endless amounts of energy attempting to cheat the system.  In the video below, a professional video gamer named Faze Jarvis learned the hard way -- as briefly described in the short video produced by CNN below:

Wow!  I guess that he forgot to read the following cheating policy by the Fortnite game maker stated below:

No one is perfect.  Although, blatantly trying to game the system (i.e., cheat the system) will have consequences that are not favorable to life looking ahead into the future.  In the case above, Faze cannot ever play the game (Fortnite) again.




Related Blog Posts:


Own Your Failure, Do Not Blame Your Teachers

Ralph Nader: How Did Boeing's CEO Perform In Front Of Congress?

Photo: CNBC

The terrible tragedies of the multiple Boeing 737 Max crash over the last few years has sent the CEO of Boeing to Congress to testify.  What happened?  Who knew up at the top (CEO and board) of shareholders about the potential problems?  These questions, along with others, were circulating in the minds of Americans last week while the CEO of Boeing was answering questions. Issues that demand answers and action. Solutions are one part, but the work (new, safer regulations) are the other critical ingredient.



Ralph Nader summarizes the show in front of Congress in his weekly letter:

Buffeting Boeing CEO’s Rope-a-Dope in Congress

This past week, Boeing’s deadly 737 MAX crashes were the focus of two back-to-back hearings – one in the Senate and one in the House. In the House Transportation Committee hearing, at least 50 Democrats and Republicans criticized Dennis Muilenburg’s mismanagement and implied criminal negligence. Muilenburg’s actions allowed Boeing’s marketeers to overrule Boeing’s engineers so that Boeing could circumvent FAA’s safety oversight, which had already been diminished by the Congress.

These hearings were held because of efforts by the families of the victim’s aboard preventable airplane crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia. Family members attended the hearings, holding up large signs with photos of their lost loved relatives. There were 346 fatalities in two crashes driven down by stealth, faulty software installed to address, what Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger called, the reduction of the “aircraft’s natural aerodynamic stability in certain conditions.”

The hearings were held in a packed room, full of media members, staffers, lobbyists, and citizen activists. House lawmakers questioned Muilenburg and his chief engineer, John Hamilton, for over five hours, during which the hugely compensated CEO made over $75,000 for pretending to be humble and respectful. The Committee members demanded to know what the top brass knew about the plane’s hazards and when they knew it.  Lower-level Boeing engineers, technicians, and test pilots had already told Boeing executives about the plane’s problems, but the warnings were ignored in the rush to market.

There were table thumping questions and demands (e.g. for Muilenburg’s resignation) by both Democrats and Republicans. However, no legislative proposals were on the table. One year after the Lion airlines plane crashed into the Java Sea, there is still no tangible effort to provide the FAA with the stronger authority, a larger budget, and the staff needed to properly oversee the aircraft/airline industry. The FAA must be able to enforce meaningful laws with civil fines and, when necessary, referrals to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. The lack of proper regulation has allowed for continued unsafe aircraft manufacturing, corner-cutting, and cover-ups.

Ever since the Congress, under Boeing pressure, ordered the FAA to delegate more self-certifying power to Boeing and other aircraft makers, hearings with the FAA, Boeing, and airlines have been theater. Nothing results except giving in to aircraft manufacturers and carriers’ demands, rubber-stamped by the toady FAA and an indentured Congress.

Given all the freebies the airlines give to the U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives (See the survey sent to every member of Congress, which has yet to receive a response) the Congress has never passed the comprehensive passenger bill of rights championed by Flyers’ Rights (https://flyersrights.org/) and numerous aviation columnists.

Given the formidable organization of the knowledgeable families and consistent, thorough media coverage, will Congress do its job? So far, the answer is – not likely. Not one member of Congress has yet returned Boeing’s campaign contributions – over three hundred members take the cash regularly. No Congressional Committee has demanded resignations of Dan Elwell or Ali Bahrami, the FAA officials responsible for enabling Boeing’s “regulatory capture” of the FAA. This failure of regulation was even condemned by the likes of Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

No Congressional Committee has even pressed for repealing the notorious provisions, inserted by Boeing, into the 2018 FAA Authorization Act that pushed the FAA further under Boeing’s giant thumb.

On the other hand, the families of the crash victims and Flyers’ Right’s Paul Hudson are advancing critical findings by the National Safety Transportation Board (See their report) and the Joint Authorities Technical Review (See their report), along with the serious findings of a long-neglected 2017 airline union sponsored report (See Aircraft Certification “Transformation” Pre-Decisional Involvement Report). With increasing numbers of aerospace safety specialists and inspectors who have been coming forward, maybe Congress can end its indentured status. Maybe the national legislature can stand tall for airline safety regulation and a reformed Boeing corporation, shorn of its presently complicit executives and trophy Board of Directors.

To make action on Capitol Hill more likely, the Congressional Committees must schedule hearings now for consumer groups, families, the airline industry unions, and very importantly, the experienced technical critics of the 737 MAX and Boeing’s handling of that aircraft – past, present, and future. All these parties have been waiting with rising impatience to be called.

In public releases, October 23 and 29, 2019, the families of Boeing’s MAX victims laid out what Boeing and the FAA need to do before the hundreds of MAX planes are allowed in the air.

Summarizing their demands: 1. If the MCAS (software) fix is not publically disclosed, the 737 MAX should not fly; 2. If the purpose of the MCAS system is not determined, the 737 MAX should not fly; 3. If there is no recertification of the whole plane as an integrated system, the 737 MAX should not fly; 4. Until Boeing fixes its culture to eliminate undue pressure on engineers, the 737 MAX should not fly; and 5. Until Boeing identifies and removes those who made the decision to conceal the MCAS from the FAA, pilots, and the public, the 737 MAX should not fly.

Paul Hudson, the longtime director of Flyers’ Rights, who is on an FAA Advisory Committee, has put forth numerous MAX-related demands, as well as a detailed series of recommendations to reform the FAA from top to bottom (https://flyersrights.org/).

Airline passengers, please note that Boeing intends to put 5,000 flawed 737 MAX airplanes into operation. Already about 400 of them have been grounded since March by U.S. and foreign airlines.

With Boeing already in trouble with its big pentagon and NASA contracts, don’t bet on its full-page ads and other propaganda. Boeing’s P.R. spin will not protect you. Rely on your own vigilance and “Axe the MAX” from your future travel plans.

Hopefully, the Congressional hearings held last week, along with those in the future, actually materialize real actionable results for the safety of the consumer.  If not, the Congress is just another puppet for the airline industry who just puts on a show (in front of Congress) to appease the viewers.  Action requires real changes to the safety of the airline industry that result in more safety.  Yes, protection of the consumer.  No more flying on dangerous planes while lining the pockets of Boeing's shareholders.



Related Blog Posts:



Ralph Nader: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Really!


Ralph Nader: Will President Trump Implode with Lies Before He is Impeached?

Ralph Nader: Shame Of A Nation

Ralph Nader: Labor Day and the Lost Opportunities for Labor Discussions

Ralph Nader: Nader pays tribute to old Republican Paul Findley

Ralph Nader: How has Boeing avoided testifying in front of Congress for the 737 Max Airplane disasters?

 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

Help Prioritize Study Details for Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Blowout Health Study

The open-ended research questions need to be shaped (prioritized) for Science research to tackle. Now is your chance to contribute to the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Blowout Health Research Study.

By Scott L from Los Angeles,

Note: My name is Dr. Mike Kaiser and I am a member of the Aliso Canyon CAG. The views, interpretations are based on my own observations while serving on the Aliso Canyon CAG. More details can be found by clicking here.

The Priority Survey below to help shape the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study can also be taken by clicking here.

Introduction: Please Help Prioritize Study Concerns

October 23rd just passed last week marking the 4th year anniversary of the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Blowout in Porter Ranch (San Fernando Valley, CA). The natural gas blowout is the largest single release of methane gas, spewing out 109,000 tons of Methane gas over the course of the time period of October 2015 through February 2016. The damage is unknown and truly incomprehensible.

SoCalGas Company was responsible for the historic blowout. Litigation resulted in an award of $113 million from the Gas Company. Part of the settlement dictates that $25 million of the settlement will be used to conduct a large-scale (historic) Health Research Study. Written into the settlement is that the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study will be conducted by a Scientific Oversight Committee (SOC).

Due to the large scale mistrust between the public and the Los Angeles Department of Public Health (LADPH), the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study aims to be as transparent as possible. LADPH has gone to local residents along with the surrounding communities (i.e. neighborhood councils) and formed a ‘Community Advisory Group’ (CAG).

The aim of the CAG is to serve as a conduit through which to convey (transmit) the health concerns of the public to the Scientific Oversight Committee to incorporate into the overall Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study. Which is to say, the questions and concerns of the community surrounding the adverse (negative) health impacts of the potential chemicals released both during the blowout and after to the SOC to incorporate into the Health Research Study.

So far, the CAG has formed and conducted a few meetings. As I expressed at the beginning of this blog post, the views expressed here and on my blog site are my interpretations while serving on the Community Advisory Group. For meeting updates and information, please visit: www.alisocanyoncag.blogspot.com

Now, onto the participation that you have been waiting for…Ready?

Please Provide — Input and Prioritize Health Concerns

One obvious recurring statement that has arisen during the first two CAG meetings is the fact that a prior ‘Health Study’ was performed by Southern California Air Quality Management District scientists. The study is described here. Residents expressed health concerns and questions to which they wanted answers. Questions such as: According to the results, the Health Study conducted by the SCAQMD was a failure.

Therefore, how will this Health Research Study be any different? Over the last few years, LADPH has collected an abundance of ‘health concerns’ and ‘health questions’ to be incorporated into the current Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study. Click here to view!

On top of the incorporation of these comments (and concerns) into the new Health Study, the CAG will ensure transparency at all levels. Keep visiting my blog site to see updates along with current happenings of the CAG and SOC working together to accomplish the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study. Additionally, CAG meetings are open to the public. I will start to post in advance of each CAG meeting — starting in November.

Time for you (the reader) to participate:

The comments collected (and will continue to be collected) are summarized in the 42 bullet statements shown below in a survey. I would ask you to choose 10 bullet statements to incorporate into the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study.

Note: there is only $25 million to devote initially to the Aliso Canyon Disaster Health Research Study. Therefore, choosing 10 statements to study from 42 choices will help the Scientific Oversight Committee come up with a few ‘research questions’ to study overall.

Remember, the survey below is my (Dr. Mike Kaiser) avenue to collect information to give to the Scientific Oversight Committee. Other CAG members may use other avenues to collect health concerns and priorities.

Choose 10 statements by checking ‘yes’ from 42 questions below and then hit “Submit”. Remember that you have to scroll down to the page — form embedded in the blog post. And be sure to hit the “Submit” button to send the survey to be collected and processed.

Historic Vote to Move Forward With Impeachment Inquiry

Photo: The Nation Magazine

When an injustice has occurred, law enforcement steps into 'arrest' the offender and move to correct the injustice.  What happens when the offender is the President of the United States of America?  Further, what happens when the injustice is so obvious but along partisan (party) lines, the division is large.  The Republicans are selling out to serve a sinking ship (i.e., the Trump administration).  The Democrats are jumping on an injustice.  How do I know that to be true?



President Trump has called the Mueller investigation over the last few years a 'hoax.'  What we have learned as Americans is that through all of the Agency (i.e., FBI, Intelligence community heads, etc.) testimony -- the overriding theme is Never Accept Foreign Help or Assistance Into A Presidential Election.  How is the current ask on behalf of the President of the United States not a blatant disregard of everything that we have heard over the last few years?



Below is a video from MSNBC's Morning Joe discussing the landmark hearing to continue moving forward with impeachment inquiry:

What is amazing about the 'closed door' proceedings that Republicans are up in arms about is the fact that they are simply to blame for these rules.  What?  Yes, the Republican Senator Trent Gowdy -- 3 years ago moved to have these proceedings behind closed door.  Yes, you did read that correctly.



What is going on in Washington D.C. is a circus.  The circus needs to be over and we (as American's) need to take back the Nation from the deceitful (and disrespectful) Trump administration.  An administration who lacks the ability to lead a nation.  The U.S. is suffering until a changeover of administrations.  Let's hope that happens sooner rather than later.

EPA CASAC Data Needs To Be Cast Into Perspective

Photo by Carolina Pimenta on Unsplash

The Trump administration is very good at capturing small victories and casting them in the light of significant 'rollbacks of the Obama administration.'  As a viewer and a voter, each of us should be aware of what a victory means. How does an administration cast a small win as a large victory? A significant win would be to totally rollback the Clean Water Act instituted by the Obama administration.  The problem, as I have explained in previous blog posts (see bottom of the blog post), is that to 'rollback' an existing regulation, a better law needs to be proposed.



What am I talking about concerning environmental victories touted by the Trump administration?



The small victories won in the courts (which are few) have been a re-evaluation of the methods used to calculate pollution.  Pollution defined broadly as GHG, water pollution, air pollution, particulate matter, etc.  What scientific methods (i.e., experimental models) are used to calculate the distribution of pollution in the environment?  The models can vary depending on the parameters entered into the models.  Can one scientific model differ widely from another and be accepted?  Most likely not.



Why?



Each model needs to be explained in court if challenged.  At the very least, before that occurs, models are tested in Congressional hearings when approved by either governing body with testimony from the current Environmental Protection Agency Administrator in power at the time.



According to Politico Energy, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler has successfully undermined science with the following ruling on the particulate matter:

EPA SCIENCE ADVISERS GRAPPLE WITH KEY AIR RULE: This week could prove to be a tipping point in Wheeler's effort to reshape how his agency uses science in rulemakings — or what his critics call a "war on science." The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, whose seven members are all Wheeler or Scott Pruitt appointees, will meet in North Carolina today and Friday to discuss the science underlying EPA's review of the particulate matter standard.

Why it's important: Most of the meeting will consist of dry debate over wonky issues, but the panel may ultimately give Wheeler justification to avoid imposing new regulations on polluting sources like power plants and cars. "They're laying the groundwork that provides Administrator Wheeler the political cover to retain the standard," said Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

At issue is a lengthy report written by EPA scientists that concluded recent science supports lowering the annual exposure limit for fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, by as much as one-third. Several outside groups have supported that finding, including the dismissed group of experts who continued their work anyway (Goldman and UCS helped organize that effort). But as Pro's Alex Guillén reported , two CASAC members with a history of pushing back on regulations tightening air quality limits have already indicated they disagree with the EPA report and don't see public health benefits from lowering the standard.

Federal courts give major credence to CASAC's recommendations , so if the two skeptical members can win over others, a recommendation to simply retain the current standard could give Wheeler a shield against future legal attacks. "The question is whether they're going to win over the other CASAC members at the meeting this week," Goldman said.

What does the above rhetoric mean?  Simply that the changes are small compared to actual regulation.  Despite the reporting, the changes cannot harm the environment to the extent that outweighs the benefit of society.  Be careful what you read and conclude on the first pass over the pages of the news.



Related Blog Posts:



Trump Administration Tries To Ignore Cross State Air Pollution Rules -- And Is Rejected By Courts


What Is The National Price Tag For Everyone To Have 'Lead Free' Pipes For Clean Water?


Another Example of the Trump administration's Efforts to Suppress Science Supporting Climate Change


Climate Change Continues To Threaten Coal Ash Flooding - Toxic Sites

Business Leaders Are More Receptive To Climate Solutions!

Does Climate Change Really Impact National Security?

Mayor Garcetti Moves Los Angeles Away From Fossil Fuel Investment

Congress Intervenes And Asks For No More Oil Drilling Off Of Florida

President Trump Is Out Of Touch With The Transition Toward Renewable Energy

EPA Director Finally Realizes Reality Of Trying To Roll-Back Obama Era Clean Air Act Regulation

Environmental Groups Question Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Cuts

President Trump's Immigration Rhetoric Damages International Science Student Enrollment

What Promises Did President Trump Make Science Research During His Campaign?

Can The President Prevent The Public From Learning About Scientific Research???

President Trump's Understanding of the Paris Agreement


World Goes Left, While Trump Leads Right - On Climate - Why?


Is This Behavior Presidential - President Trump?


Paris Climate Agreement Is A Start Toward The Renewable Energy Future


READ THIS BEFORE VOTING -- Presidential Science (WORLD) Issues!


Brings Jobs Back By Promoting Renewable Energy!

Biodiesel Advocacy Groups and Others Urge Secretary of Commerce to Slow Decisions Down in Argentina

Photo: Civil Eats

Have you ever written an elected official for a cause?  In a past post, I discussed the fact that politicians do read and respond to their constituents.  When I read about politicians receiving letters from advocacy groups (or even fellow politicians), I cannot help but wonder what does that letter say -- exactly?  Further, how does the letter writer express their thoughts on a given cause to motivate action on part of the receiver?  Below is an example of the collaborative effort of both the biodiesel industry and the soybean industry.  Enjoy!



According to a letter from the biodiesel fuel and soybean industry is shown below:

The Honorable Wilbur Ross

Secretary of Commerce

U.S. Department of Commerce

1401 Constitution Ave NW

Washington, DC 20230

Dear Secretary Ross, 

On behalf of the members of the National Biodiesel Board (NBB) and American Soybean Association (ASA), we would like to request a meeting with you as soon as possible, before the U.S. Department of Commerce finalizes its Changed Circumstances Review of the Countervailing Duty Orders on Biodiesel from Argentina.

When NBB’s Fair Trade Coalition met with you on June 20, you generously offered to meet with the domestic biodiesel industry “at any time.” However, since Commerce issued the preliminary results in the review on July 9, our multiple requests to schedule a meeting with you have gone unanswered. And while we greatly appreciate meeting recently with Assistant Secretary of Commerce Jeffrey Kessler, we still hope that you can provide us the same courtesy that you provided to representatives of the government of Argentina and meet with us.

It remains unclear why Commerce is rushing to issue final results when recent developments in Argentina suggest a likely change in leadership and tax policy. As you know, the countervailing duty rates established early in 2018 were needed to redress years of massive subsidies benefiting Argentina’s biodiesel industry. The review of the duty rates must protect the U.S. biodiesel industry and soybean

farmers from any potential resumption of those subsidies and unfair trade practices. It seems clear that Argentina’s tax policies are likely to continue to change, as they have on numerous occasions in recent years. It is far more important for Commerce to make the right decision in this review, rather than a quick decision.

U.S. soybean growers continue to find international markets unbalanced as a result of uncertainty over trade agreements and retaliatory trade practices. Farm income has been cut by half in just the last five years, with the greatest slide occurring over the last two. While U.S. soybean farmers continue to experience reduced demand and lower prices as a result of trade disruptions to address unfair practices by China unrelated to soybean markets, it would be inconsistent and further damaging to relax measures addressing unfair practices by Argentina that harm U.S. soybean oil demand. The farm economy does not need Commerce to rush a decision to benefit Argentina’s farmers and biodiesel industry.

We look forward to meeting with you as soon as possible, before you sign off on a final decision in the review of countervailing duties on Argentine biodiesel.

Sincerely,

Donnell M. Rehagen, CEO

National Biodiesel Board

Davie Stephens, President

American Soybean Association

The world is an interconnected place where industries that may seem not connected at all are in fact tied together in an unusual manner.  The letter above is regarding the agricultural industry.  Although, in other letters, we (the public) learn that industries that are thought to be quite different are in fact dependent on one another. 



This goes to show that the world is more interconnected and complex than is portrayed on television.  When each of us reads and learns more about the interconnectedness, relations between countries (and nations) can more easily be understood.  Furthermore, support by our nation can more easily be accepted and promoted to regions that are seemingly interconnected to us -- financially and politically.