Guns Across the Border

A study by the IGARAPE Institute of Brazil and the Trans Border Institute of the University of San Diego provides some startling estimates of firearm trafficking. This study estimates that between 100,000 and 380,000 weapons are smuggled across the border annually from the United States to Mexico.  This smuggling has increased markedly from the 90’s.  The strict firearms control laws in Mexico make it a prime market for traffickers. 

How ironic that the United States is providing the weapons to the drug warriors who are killing each other to determine who supplies drugs to the abundant market here.

But is there more?  Could Mexico be the first stop of these guns on their way to Afghanistan to be used against our troops?  Surely gun traffickers have no conscience, and U.S. Government’s ability to intercept trafficking is limited.

Please, somebody, prove to me that movement of our weapons to Afghanistan isn’t—couldn’t be—happening.

Cloning Ancient Trees--and what else?

I recently learned of a project in which a small non-profit organization plans to clone some of the largest and oldest trees in the world and use these clones to create new forests.  This project, known as the Archangel Ancient Tree Archive, will collect genetic material from such trees as Coastal Redwoods, Giant Sequoias, Giant Irish Oaks and others and develop infant trees with genetics identical to those of their parents.  These infants will be planted and nurtured in different parts of the world where conditions are favorable for growth.  The largest and oldest of each species will be sought.  Why?  Because these are deemed to have the strongest genetics thereby creating the most sustainable forest where planted.

Redwood forests are difficult to establish because of the unique conditions under which they thrive and the  ecosystem they produce to sustain the forest.  But it can be done as one can see in a visit to Stow Grove Park in Goleta.  There a grove of redwoods, planted a century ago, reaches skyward, promising to be the largest and most noble trees in the Santa Barbara area.

The first planting by the Archangel project took place last December near Port Orford Oregon where thousands of Coastal Redwood and Giant Sequoia clones were planted.  This grove is being watched with great interest.

As I ponder the growth of these tree clones, I wonder about cloning humans.  There is, of course, cloning research going on in the form of therapeutic cloning in which cells identical to an individual’s own are injected to replace damaged or disintegrated cells.  Early results are expected in repairing severed nerves, eye damage and other cellular damage.

 

But what about cloning entire humans?  Would it be good to have copies of some of the greatest leaders, scientists and statesmen of our time to enhance our gene pool?  It’s a controversial subject, but I’m opposed to it.  It’s too hitleresque.  I expect that it won’t happen during my lifetime.

In the meantime, I will watch with interest the results of the Archangel project.  Please read about it at http://www.ancienttreearchive.org/.

Petitioning the Government

In 2011, the Obama Administration inaugurated an initiative known as “We the People.” The objective was to encourage people to send petitions to the White House.    With enough signatures, the petitions will be read and commented on.  The White House web page contains instructions for submitting a petition and includes petitions which are in process to which one can add his or her signature (electronically).

Now this seems like a good idea.  A problem in our democratic system is that when we vote for someone to represent us, we typically have a choice of only two persons, neither of which may exactly mirror our wishes on all issues.  We can make our personal agenda known by messages to our elected representatives; one letter is equivalent to 1000 votes, as goes the conventional wisdom.   But it takes a large number of the same message to have an impact on the decision makers, and how few people do it anyway?  That’s where the petition comes in.

Not all petitions are serious, though.  Some of the less than serious or implausible petitions that have been started are “Build a Death Star”,  “Try Senator Feinstein for Treason”,  “Fire Pierce Morgan from CNN”,  “Impeach Obama”, “Nationalize the Twinkie Industry” etc.  The death star (Star Wars series) petition got 25,000 signatures, forcing the White House to respond.  Since then they have upped the threshold to 100,000 signatures.

Reading about these petitions reminded me something I saw earlier this year.  Some young people were soliciting signatures for a petition to “impeach Obama” in front of our local post office.  I inquired of one of the people taking signatures as to what specific “acts of treason or high crimes and misdemeanors” were the basis for the petition.  The answer was a rattling of political rhetoric that could hardly give basis for impeachment no matter what one’s political bent might be.  Thinking about it later, I tried to understand  the purpose of the petition.  In a generally Democratic district in a Democratic state, this petition could hardly get serious notice.  But there is another possible angle.  What if those signatures and addresses (snail mail or e-mail) were to be used for a targeted mailing list for soliciting funds for conservative causes or other advertising?  If so, I’d say it’s a clever ploy.

But in spite of frivolousness and hidden agendas, I still like the idea of a petition to our government.  And it’s guaranteed by article I of the Constitution.

CRITICAL THINKING

The California Superintendent of Public Instruction recommends a change in the school testing approach to increase emphasis on critical thinking. The testing changes will also mandate changes to the curriculum. 

A good idea although we might anticipate some objections.  Those who think critically are not always good followers.  Yet critical thinkers are needed for discovery and innovation which are necessary for the U.S. to maintain its challenged global leadership in many areas.

Some thinking is required to envision the impact of critical thinking.  An example that I like is that of Nicholaus Copernicus (1473-1543).  For decades of observing the celestial objects, he reasoned that the earth must be revolving around the sun, not the other way around as was a common belief and an edict of the Church.  He documented his findings secretly providing a rich basis for future scientists’ work.

Another example of a critical thinker was Christopher Columbus.  He ignored some primitive fears that the world was flat and that ships would fall off of it into…something.  He reasoned that since the world is a globe, one could sail due west and arrive at the other side of the Eurasian-African land mass where spices and other desired commodities could be found.  He had it right, of course, but he had no idea that American land mass would be in his way.   His critical thinking set in place centuries of the New World exploration and development.

There are also some examples of non-critical thinking.  Think about 2008 when the economy collapsed and many banks nearly went under.  The combined efforts of Wall Street, the banks, realtors and home buyers created a huge bubble that was destined to explode.  What were they thinking?

Another example of non-critical thinking is in the political battling (grandstanding) about the federal deficit.  Both sides appear to agree that government spending cuts are necessary for deficit reduction, yet both want the other side to specify the reductions and take the heat from the electorate.   Critical thinking on both sides might result in a working together to find the cuts that will cause the least hurt to the citizenry.

At the risk of sounding negative, I suspect that control of the debt and deficit will be passed on to our future generations.  Let us hope that our descendants will have developed the skill of critical thinking to solve these problems.

Meteors

Does it bother anyone else, as it bothers me, that there are so many unanswered questions about the meteor that caused havoc in Russia recently?  As I write this, another meteor, 2012DA14, is making its closest path to the earth, some 17,000 miles, and is not expected to have noticeable physical impact nor will it be visible to the naked eye.

Scientists have tracked 2012DA14 for months, but the as yet-unnamed meteor in Russia seems to have come as a surprise.  Why?  An explanation given on NBC this morning is that the one in Russia was much smaller.  Wait!  The one in Russia was said to be 15 meters in diameter; 2012DA14 was reported to be one-third the size of a football field (30 meters in diameter).  If those estimates are correct, is that enough difference enough to account for the difference of effects?  I don’t think so; we must ask how close the one in Russia came to the earth to have exploded and burned up in the atmosphere.

Knowing how close the Russian meteor came to the earth, scientists can determine where it should have been detected on radar or by other means.   Radar return signals attenuate with the 4^th power of the distance (conversely increase with the 4^th root of the distance for an approaching object).   So somewhere as it approached closer to the earth, the Russian meteor should have produced a stronger radar return than 2012DA14. 

I suspect that there are scientists frantically scratching their heads or punching their computers looking for an explanation.  Perhaps the answer is already known and it has not gotten to the media.  I hope that it hasn’t been blocked for political reasons.  But whatever, the media needs to probe more deeply into this question.

GUNS

January 30, 2013.  Today there were two more shootings, one on a school bus and one in a workplace.

The head of the NRA recently said, “The best defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”  Sounds reasonable.  Or does it?

Consider this:  The United States Secret Service officers are among the world’s best trained and most disciplined “good guys.”  Yet in my lifetime there were two incidents of a president of the United States being shot while surrounded and protected by these “good guys.”  The bad guys always have the element of secrecy and surprise on their side.

And consider the NRA statement that there should be armed guards in every school to protect the students.   School employees taking occasional pistol range practice?   Not enough.  I suggest that to have countered the Sandy Point Elementary massacre would have required something akin to counter-terrorist training and discipline.  How many such guards would be required in each school?  And how would they be paid for?  Added taxes or reduced spending on learning activities? 

It’s not just the more than 130,000 schools nationwide.  Would it not be logical to apply the same concept of protection to churches, synagogues, public meeting places, theaters, restaurants, shopping malls, workplaces?  See, when one carries the thought further how ludicrous it becomes.  It would be hitting the mother lode for manufacturers and distributors of firearms and the NRA which receives large financial support from these industries.  But an impossible financial burden for the country.

What can and should be done?   After incidents like the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre there arises a loud cry of “don’t take our guns away.”  Don’t worry gun owners—your right to bear arms is guaranteed by the constitution and by the voting power of millions of gun owners.  And rightly so—we are all safer in our homes because the would-be attacker never knows whether he will face a loaded weapon.  (Yes I meant “he.”  Although large numbers of women own firearms, the perpetrators of gun crimes historically are predominately males.)

          It’s sad when gun owners and the NRA give more thought to the imagined threat to their right to own guns than to protection of our precious school children by more effective background checks and taking large-magazine weapons off the streets.  

The Other Story

Most of us heard this story in our elementary school:  George Washington as a boy chopped down a cherry tree in his father’s orchard.  When his father asked who destroyed the tree, George replied humbly that he couldn’t tell a lie—he did it.  Because of his truthfulness, George wasn’t punished.   To us this is a nice story making the case for truthfulness, but there is another story, much stronger, about the unwavering leadership that this man employed under the most difficult conditions in the forging of a new nation.

We also heard this story about Abraham Lincoln:  As a young man operating a store, Lincoln failed to give a customer the right change by a few cents.  When he realized his mistake, he walked several miles through the rain to give the customer the few pennies owed.  While this story makes a case for honesty, the other story—that of Lincoln’s courage in keeping the Union together and ending the scourge of slavery—must also be told.

Who knows whether these anecdotal accounts actually occurred, but the lesson of honesty was an important one to impress on young minds.  The other stories come later when the young minds can comprehend the more complex issues.

I am reminded of a radio program that I heard frequently in the 70’s and 80’s called “The Rest of The Story.”  Aired daily and narrated by Paul Harvey, it was a series of vignettes telling previously unheard stories, usually about some prominent historical figure.  I relished these stories!  Were they all true?   I really didn’t care.  Just hearing new twists added to things I already knew was exhilarating.

Currently there is a TV series entitled “Untold History of the United States,” the work of film director Oliver Stone.  I watched one segment of the series and formed a quite negative reaction.  The untold stories seemed to be derogatory to the U.S., telling about blunders, some stupid, some malicious.  Although Stone claims to have fact check supporting his assertions, I remain skeptical.  Having said that, I am curious about new historical information that might appear in these videos. 

It should be no surprise that history is often recorded incompletely or sometimes dead wrong.  I am doing historical research on Santa Barbara North County, and I have found numerous incidents of conflicting information among sources.  Newspaper accounts often don’t tell the story as written in history books; history books themselves sometimes conflict with each other.

We history buffs find it an interesting and stimulating challenge to find the other stories behind historic events or personalities.   That’s why my curiosity might drive me to watch more of the Oliver Stone videos.