JULY 4TH, 2002

PRAY FOR PEACE  --  BUT PREPARE FOR THE WORST

Hi,

Thanks to everyone for all the positive feedback on the suggested new "Pledge of Allegiance" for America (shown again, below).

Jennifer Viereck commented (also shown below) that the phrase "embracing technology" is too strong.

When I ride my "state of the art" mountainbike through the forest, or get my home ready for earthquakes (or terrorism) with the latest wind-up radio technology and modern survival equipment, I am embracing technology.  When the doctor fixes me up, more often than not he needs to use modern technology.  Doctors in Afghanistan don't have access to the modern medical wonders we have here.  Because of this, many of the hundreds who were wounded in this week's "friendly fire" bombing at a wedding will die.  All our medical wonders couldn't do a thing for those who were killed, but if they had our level of technology, many of the wounded could be saved.

Although one other writer had some additional criticisms on the proposed new Pledge (for example, he would like to see the pledge be to the Constitution, rather than to the land), a number of people have told me they liked the whole thing just the way it is.

One small statement, a simple Pledge, cannot sum up one's personal touch with nature, or with technology.  A few years ago I visited the Redwoods in California.  What I discovered was that old-growth forests are phenomenally important to the ecosystem, and yet nearly all efforts to preserve our few remaining old-growth forests turn out to be more facade than real eco-management.  I was shocked by what I found:
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/misc/stories/redwoods/redwoods.htm

All ecosystems on Earth must be managed.  Otherwise, we will undoubtedly, definitely, unquestionable, and unfortunately, pollute them, as we have already, biologically, chemically, and with radioactive waste.  Not one cubic centimeter of topsoil anywhere, not even one cubic millimeter, is untouched on this earth by man's waste.  We must learn to manage our destructive tendencies.

We could simply thank God for the Internet, but the surprising truth of it is, we can thank DARPA more directly, as they actually built it and tested it and then released its technology to the public.  And it's a good thing it was built to satisfy military reliability standards, too.  Because of that, it is robust, and it is about 99.9% accurate, and that's without even bothering with encryption and return receipts.  Email's a good thing, and computerized typesetting for journalists is, too.

Hemp is another good thing -- you can make paper out of it, fuel oil, lubricants, clothing, safety gear, rope, and so on.  Technological breakthroughs have resulted in cars that can run using hemp oil for fuel.  Yet it's illegal to grow hemp in America, possibly due to the lumber industry which fears this fast-growing weed, and possibly due to the ridiculous and unconstitutional Drug War.

Statistics is a brand-new science, in many ways. Much of it is less than 100 years old -- not as young as nuclear technology, and not nearly as young as computers or the Internet, but still fairly young and in fact, it was only after the computer came along that a lot of epidemiological studies became possible which had, up until then, been TOO COMPLEX to accomplish within available budgets.

Adequate studies of Low-Level Radiation's dangers require massive amounts of computer time (as well as a willingness to actually do the research, such as analyzing baby teeth, and so forth).

So, while I agree that "embracing" may seem like a strong word to some, I think it is the right word. 

We have to stop the nuclear Mafia from claiming they are "high-tech".  They are not.  High-tech produces something useful for society without undue risk of damage to our fragile ecosystem.  Computer-designed wind turbines are high-tech.  Plutonium "Radioactive Thermoelectric Generators" for outer space exploration are not (the idea is from the 1940's or 50's and is Russian, and very outdated).

The sum amount of knowledge any one human can now know, even with all the advances in educational software tools (of which I have made a humble contribution, myself), is vastly less than the total sum of human knowledge.  So, no one human can know enough to analyze the full relevance of all the significant data to any complex problem which has been presented to us.

What to do with radioactive waste is apparently a very complex problem.  Proof of that is the recirculation of the same tired ideas, say, every 20 to 30 years.  For example, rocketing the waste into outer space.  The bugaboo remains rocket reliability.  The solution?  Why, build more reliable rockets, of course!  After 50 years in rocketry, size has gone up, and the shuttles are more reliable than most rockets (perhaps only because they are more inspected, considering right now all are grounded for cracking problems).  Rocketry continues to be a highly risky business, and success is never a guarantee. In 100 years maybe reliability will go up.  But by then we will have several orders of magnitude more waste to SEND UP, so reliability would have to go up proportionately for the option to even begin to be considered.  But, it is highly unlikely that overall reliability of rocket launches will go up, because of the amount of "space debris" which is already up there, and the rate that the debris field is growing!  The gauntlet is too dangerous to send radioactive waste through, and will only get worse.  So guess what?  We're stuck with it.

But even so, rocketry is touted to the uninitiated, the uneducated, and the unwary -- every couple of years someone in a place of authority in government mentions it as a possible solution to the nuclear waste problem.  And the rocketeers continue to launch radioactive waste into space every so often, and sometimes their rockets blow up (they call these nuke waste space missions "exploration").

Nuclear Power Plants are old-fashioned, dangerous, ill-conceived, Luddite technology, and the Worldcom/Xerox/Enron debacles will pale in comparison to General Electric, Westinghouse, and all the nuclear suppliers and liars going down, which they WILL EVENTUALLY DO.  That stock market crash is coming, and the smart retirement plans are divesting their nuclear stock NOW, and will do so even more in the coming weeks, months, and years.

I do think technology should be embraced, and my own "love affair" with technology is indeed a deep and lasting one, but I also embrace nature, and hope that we can keep the two in proper balance.

Sincerely,

Russell D. Hoffman
Concerned Citizen
Carlsbad, CA

====================================================

At 06:31 PM 6/30/02 , HOME <heal@h-o-m-e.org> wrote:
That 'embracing technology' bit is a little too broad for me- I think our love affair with technology over ethics and common sense is what got us here. I try to limit its uses in my life as much as I can.
Jennifer

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russell D. Hoffman wrote:

News item:
"For the first time ever, a federal appeals court Wednesday (June 26th, 2002) declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional ..."
(Quoted from: http://www.msnbc.com/news/772714.asp)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------
Suggested new Pledge of Allegiance for the United States of America:
I pledge allegiance to the LAND,
of the United States of America,
And to the PEOPLE,
who will live on that land,
One nation,
nuclear-free,
environmentally just,
seeking truth and enlightenment,
embracing technology and open communication,
with liberty, peace, and justice for all.

Author:
A CITIZEN who believes that the united will of the people of a great country can force its leaders into correct action.
A God-fearing PATRIOT who prays that America has a future.
A FATHER-TO-BE who wants his progeny to breath clean air, drink fresh water, and eat healthy food.
A HUMANITARIAN who is tired of the environmental (especially nuclear) lies under which we now live AND DIE.  Yucca Mountain is awful.  Keeping the nuke power plants open and storing the used reactor cores on site is even worse. SHUT 'EM DOWN NOW!
Dated: June 26th, 2002
JUST SAY "NO" TO NUCLEAR POWER!
JUST SAY "YES" TO TODAY'S PEACEFUL REVOLUTION TO THE NEW AMERICA!
IF YOU WANT IT TO HAPPEN, JUST PASS THIS AROUND! THAT'S ALL IT TAKES TO BE A PATRIOT TODAY!
DEADLINE: JULY 4th 2002?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------


--
Jennifer Olaranna Viereck, Director
HOME: Healing Ourselves & Mother Earth
Yucca Mt. Needs You!    http://www.h-o-m-e.org
How close are you to Nuke-waste routes? See www.mapsicence.org
Sign the Yucca Mt. Petition and forward to all your friends at
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/711740242

====================================================