ifling

 Now here is something truly stupid. There are certain people who are either in their own way ignorant of the fact that they are indeed total spammers, or are worse than computer viruses. I do apologize for the length of this message but felt it important to include the whole of the message I received in order that I might the better provide my analysis of it to anyone who might be reading this.

What follows I received in my email as a fw:fw:fw: etc message. You have all gotten them.  Please read on

Now, THIS is really fascinating - it’s rather dazzling to see it presented this way.

I CERTAINLY THOUGHT THIS WAS ENLIGHTENING. BEYOND OUR SUN … IT’S A BIG UNIVERSE.

ANTARES IS THE 15TH BRIGHTEST STAR IN THE SKY.

IT IS MORE THAN 1000 LIGHT YEARS AWAY.

NOW HOW BIG ARE YOU?

——————————————————————

NOW TRY TO WRAP YOUR MIND AROUND THIS………

THIS IS A HUBBLE TELESCOPE ULTRA DEEP FIELD INFRARED VIEW OF COUNTLESS

‘ENTIRE’ GALAXIES BILLIONS OF LIGHT-YEARS AWAY.

BELOW IS A CLOSE UP OF ONE OF THE DARKEST REGIONS OF THE PHOTO ABOVE.

HUMBLING, ISN’T IT?

KEEP LIFE IN PERSPECTIVE.

AND DON’T SWEAT THE SMALL STUFF!

If you have gotten this far, I thank you for persisting and offer you to read on.

There are many incarnations of these messages that pervade the email system, and the internet in general. Some are meant to be cute, others dire warnings of some nature, many are just plain stupid. Like this one above, which I will address first.

This message is poorly thought out and even more poorly executed. Firstly in assuming that the size of any star or galaxy that is so far away it takes half the lifespan of a galaxy for its light to reach us has any bearing whatsoever on the condition of your life is absurd.

“Don’t have enough money to buy new shoes for your children? SO WHAT? There is a star so big as to make our sun look like a grain of sand, and it takes light from that star 1000 years to make it into the eyepiece of a telescope in some one else’s back yard. Too bad you cannot afford a telescope either or you might know this too.”

Got the Flu? Big deal. your are just one person on a planet so insignificant it does not even rate in size compared to the other planets it shares a solar system with. Of course, you are just one person, what could it matter that you are sick? In 1918, one man, a soldier from the United States was transported to Europe to fight in WWI. He had the flu. The resultant epidemic lasted for two years, and literally spread to the most remote parts of our insignificant planet, the artctic and Hawai’i. It is estimated that between 20 and 100 million people were killed worldwide or the approximate equivalent of one third of the population of Europe, more than double the number killed in WWI.

One man. One man brought about the Black Plague to Europe killing over 100 million people. AIDS can be traced to one man, and one mistake in laboratory procedure.  But what does it matter? It was all small stuff when it happened.

What does it matter if there is one more car on the highway? Or one less tree in Brazil? Will you feel the difference if its 70 degrees outside, or 71? Probably not. Doesn’t matter, does it. One degree in average temperature increase globally will effect weather and precipitation patterns globally. Oceans will rise, droughts will ravage starving countries, floods will destroy communities. But what are the chances of any of this happening?

Mars is our nearest neighbor and approximately 200 million miles away. It takes seven months to get a robot the size of a Volkswagon Beetle to land there. Without even considering how long it would take to make Mars a livable climate, how many people can you fit in a Volkswagon? Would you like to spend seven months sitting next to them? 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, eating, sleeping, performing bodily functions?

How many people does it take to create a viable breeding population? For long term success, around 500. Numbers will vary, but to prevent inbreeding and protect against a congenital defect ravaging a population, lets call it 500. How many people will fit in  Volkswagon? We send them about 5 at a time in the Space Shuttle and that costs 450 million just to get into orbit around this planet, and that is only about 200 miles. How much to send 500 people, 200 million miles? Let me write a check!

I have not been on in a while. You would think that being unemployed should open you up to all kinds of free time, but it seems to have had the opposite effect on me.

That is not what I am here about. I was clearing out the junk from an old notebook when I came across these thoughts:

Progress is a declining curve where we equate making life better with making life easier.

Ease of living is at the root to a lack for concern for the future.

Ease of life is in inverse proportion to the time into the future to which a person will look.

Concern for the future is directly proportional to the drive for progress.

Progress is a declining curve where we equate making life better with making life easier. By this I mean that most of the progress mankind has made throughout its history has had one goal. Making life easier through creature comforts: a warm comfortable place to live, enough to eat, freedom from disease and extended life.

Ease of living is at the root to a lack for concern for the future. When life is difficult you work hard and look to the future for improvement. When life is easy you look for leisure pursuits with which you can enjoy the moment.

Ease of life is in inverse proportion to the time into the future to which a person will look. Simply imagine yourself in debt. Deep in debt you are low on the curve the describes how easy your life may be, and the farther into the future until you contemplate the freedom to spend on luxury. If you are free of debt, you are high on the ease of life curve and you need not look beyond your next paycheck for those luxuries.

Concern for the future is directly proportional to the drive for progress. Free of the concerns for satisfying creature comforts, most people will not look beyond the moment.

To sum up this equation: As progress makes life easier, the motivation that drives that progress declines, we cease to be concerned for the future. This was originally part of a philosophy that I was developing for a work of fiction that has since transformed beyond using this thought, but i find it relevant to much of the state of the world today. At least in the US. It is by no means a complete thought, neither do you have to look very hard for signs of exactly what I am saying.

The title of the movie “Blood Diamonds,” refers to the diamond trade in South Africa, one of the leading exporters of diamonds worldwide, and the extent to which trade in these diamonds funds guerilla warfare, the destruction of villages, and kidnapping of children who are forced to serve in these armies. For more information: http://www.un.org/peace/africa/Diamond.html

Leonardo DiCaprio starred in “Blood Diamonds,” and is an activist for global change both environmental and economic, and I applaud him for his efforts when it is so easy for the privileged in any country to live their life free of other people’s worry. And in his effort he has now lent his name and his wrist wear to an auction of unique, and expensive watches from which all proceeds will benefit The Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation. http://www.leonardodicaprio.org/aboutus
http://hauteconcept.com/2008/07/09/leonardo-dicaprio-teams-up-with-watchmaker-jaeger-lecoultre/

One of these watches, the Reverso Gyrotourbillon 2, is described as “made out of Platinum” and valued at $400,000. The other, Titanium and Carbon Fiber and valued at $300,000 was worn by Leo himself to the opening of the documentary “The 11th Hour.”

Platinum is a rare precious metal, more expensive than gold and one of the leading producers of the metal? South Africa. Below is an excerpt from the IRIN report found here: http://www.irinnews.org/PrintReport.aspx?ReportId=77533

“JOHANNESBURG, 31 March 2008 (IRIN) - Alleged human rights abuses by Anglo Platinum (AP), the worlds leading producer of platinum, could spark investigations through-out South Africa’s mining industry.

“The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) said it would probe accusations by international rights watchdog, ActionAid, of forced resettlement and contamination of water supplies in communities surrounding AP’s Limpopo province mines in the north of the country.

“‘Some of the poorest people on earth are paying a heavy price for the global platinum boom,’ according to Zanele Twala, ActionAid’s country director in South Africa. ‘Communities, especially women, have lost their main means of survival – access to land and water. We believe this constitutes a violation of their basic human rights.’ “

Platinum is valued in the vicinity of $2000US an ounce.

So consider that for a mere $300,000, or however much the auction should take in, you can be the proud owner of a Titanium, carbon fiber time piece worn by and engraved with the signature of Leonardo Dicaprio.

Leading Titanium producers worldwide? 2002-2005: South Africa, 48%; Australia, 34%; Canada, 10%; Ukraine, 4%; and other, 4%.

And the impact, both environmental and humanitarian?

* Destruction of the local landscape,
* Exposure to radio-active radiation (titanium-related minerals like rutile, ilmenite and zircon contain inert quantities of uranium and thorium which are potential radio-active emitters which could be activated during mineral processing) and
*Alteration the area’s soil chemical conditions.

“Other negative effects that would result from the project, the report said, are that it would contaminate ground water bodies, increase competition for water resources, degrade the water quality, and lead to gaseous emissions (sulphur dioxide) emitted into the air from combustion of heavy oils”

“Sea pollution, they noted, now constituted a real hazard in the island largely due to the mining of titanium there. (Madagascar)”

http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/corporates/news/mining_madagascar.html
http://www.g21.net/africa2.html

I do not accuse Mr. DiCaprio or Jaeger-LeCoultre, the manufacturer of the watch of supporting any of the aforementioned activities, in fact I will stipulate that I presume they are sorely opposed to any environmental or human rights violations. In fact, LeCoultre has undertaken a program to recycle and use recycled paper while undertaking carbon-offsetting procedures. Nor do I suggest they have purchased the precious metals in question from any suppliers that are guilty of these violations. But to what extent does creating such a high profile for these watches generate demand for items made from these metals? In a consumer society such as ours, what price are we willing to pay? What would $400,000 buy for one of those villages?

If there were no link between what we see celebrities wear, and what the public wants, there would be no such thing as product placement in movies. There would be no lucrative endorsement contracts for movie stars and leading sports figures.

I am forced to wonder, what would the reaction be if one of these watches was decorated with a few diamonds? And that is what these watches are. Nothing more or less than decoration for the over privileged in their continued quest for self aggrandizement while they attain a veneer of caring about the world which celebrates them.

Back in the year 2000, there was a crash in stock market. While the internet was a global phenomenon, it’s value was still little understood by many, and it was these people who drove a boom in tech stocks, buying up web-sites that offered little more than the promise of content and paying outrageous prices. They built a castle on a soap bubble and as had to happen there was a collapse that wiped out Five Trillion dollars in market value.

This is what I see happening in the Green/Organic movement. Call it sustainability, or what have you. Too few people understand it, and too many think that buying a ticket to see “An Inconvenient Truth” or “The 11th Hour” constitutes making a contribution. Or that buying locally grown and cutting back on visits to Starbucks, or cell phone minutes is a sacrifice. “Green” and “Organic” have become product, more than practice.

Quoted from:http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/organic.html

Passage of the Organic Foods Production Act forced the USDA to develop an official definition. “On December 16, 1997, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service proposed rules for a National Organic Program [7]. The proposal applied to all types of agricultural products and all aspects of their production and handling, ranging from soil fertility management to the packaging and labeling of the final product. The proposal included: (a) national standards for production and handling, (b) a National List of approved synthetic substances, (c) a certification program, (d) a program for accrediting certifiers, (e) labeling requirements, (f) enforcement provisions, and (g) rules for importing equivalent products. The proposed rule defined organic farming and handling as:

“A system that is designed and managed to produce agricultural products by the use of methods and substances that maintain the integrity of organic agricultural products until they reach the consumer. This is accomplished by using, where possible, cultural, biological and mechanical methods, as opposed to using substances, to fulfill any specific function within the system so as to: maintain long-term soil fertility; increase soil biological activity; ensure effective pest management; recycle wastes to return nutrients to the land; provide attentive care for farm animals; and handle the agricultural products without the use of extraneous synthetic additives or processing in accordance with the Act and the regulations in this part.

“The weed and pest-control methods to which this refers include crop rotation, hand cultivation, mulching, soil enrichment, and encouraging beneficial predators and microorganisms. If these methods are not sufficient, various listed chemicals can be used. (The list does not include cytotoxic chemicals that are carbon-based.) The proposal did not call for monitoring specific indicators of soil and water quality, but left the selection of monitoring activities to the producer in consultation with the certifying agent.

“For raising animals, antibiotics would not be permitted as growth stimulants but would be permitted to counter infections. The rules permit up to 20% of animal feed to be obtained from non-organic sources. This was done because some nutrients (such as trace minerals) are not always available organically. Irradiation, which can reduce or eliminate certain pests, kill disease-causing bacteria, and prolong food shelf-life, would be permitted during processing. Genetic engineering would also be permissible.

Find out for yourself what it really means.

When I heard those haunting lyrics taken from “Cry Little Sister” by Gerard McMann I figured there was a new release of the 1987, Joel Schumacher film “The Lost Boys.” But OH so sadly not. Oh no.

Coming straight to DVD, from the creative minds that would probably bring you such mega hits of straight to DVD as “Out of Africa 2, Back to Africa,” or “Pincchio 2, This time its Personal,” or “Jaws 3-D,” (oops, that one was real) prepare yourself to sit through Corey Feldman’s biggest comeback attempt since “Super Robot Monkey Team Hyperforce Go!”

You guessed it!
“Lost Boys 2, The Tribe.”

I enjoyed “The Lost Boys” for what it was, a fun summer movie, and would watch it again if it came on cable, if I had cable. But since it has never really occurred to me to put in the NetFlix queue, I guess I can wait a little longer for my next viewing. Though I did enjoy it, would even recommend to others to see it, it was never really lightning in a bottle, which can only greatly reduce the chances that it could be captured twice with the advent of a sequel.

They have sweetened the original song so that it has lost much of the haunting quality it had the first time around. Much like recent criminal act of digitally re-mastering Creedence Clearwater Revival so that all the scratchiness is removed for your listening pleasure. And no doubt using the same philosophy that thought up colorizing movies and applying the technique to movies that were intentionally filmed in black and white some 30 years or more after the advent of color cinematography.

And since this post is not a review of the movie, rather a critique of the fact that it was made at all, I feel no compunction to actually see it. Yet strangely feel absolutely no qualms about continuing, so I will. Even from the preview, I can see the writers come from that school that is good enough at mimicking the jokes, tag lines, and gimmicks of their favorite genres to appease the same audience that would go and see the likes of “Transformers,” without actually understanding those elements. You know, a lot like Quentin Tarentino with “Kill Bill.”

Possibly it was thought that recasting Corey Haim and Corey Feldman, reuniting the dream team of the mid eighties, would bring back the old audience, while updating the concept for a new generation would bring in a younger crowd. That gives me a thought!

For those who do not know, Corey Feldman got his start as a child doing voice work on Disney’s “The Fox and The Hound.” Disney is famous for merchandising the life, and quality, out of a story through straight to video production. I propose an updated sequel to “The Fox and The Hound” where foxes that have been over hunted are now being re-introduced into the wild. PETA has been capturing the ones that live in urban areas and Corey voices the, now CGI, fox as a hip, eighties “would have been” pop singer, Micheal Jackson/Madonna impersonator who is now totally lost and out of place in a national park where he is befriended by a wolf puppy, reintroduced to the US from Canada. The Fox is always trying to get his picture taken by tourists and environmentalists so someone from his city will recognize him, while the wolf is trying to teach him to kill chickens, which the Organic farmers leave out for him because it is all a part of the great “Circle of Life.”

I hereby claim and retain all copyright to this concept.

“Oh, I can’t give that up. Its just a little indulgence that really costs just a little bit.”

BULL&*$%! And get used to it. Giving up your little cell phone so you can talk to your friends while you drive is not even a sacrifice. This country has been built on a model that was destined to fail since the end of WWII. Open your eyes and keep your excuses to yourselves. Look at the energy prices in Europe, in fact most of the rest of the world. How long did you think we were going to escape those prices? The war is at best just an excuse, at worst just a catalyst, a tipping point for the balance to swing the other way. And all most of us can say is “why should I have to give up my petty little indulgences?”

Since the end of WWII we have been building the massive system of suburbs so we can all live farther and farther from where we work. So we can all have a yard, and big status symbol house that has far more space and uses far more energy than it should. The typical house in the US, for the same size family, has doubled in square footage over the past few decades. Those same decades that we were enjoying those cheap energy prices. Now, how many people are sitting on top of a FOR SALE sign hoping their white elephant will move? Or worse, a FORCLOSURE sign. I can tell you this, I and many like me are out of work because of it.

Who even remembers that there used to be one, maybe two phones in your house based on actual use instead of how many minutes you think you are going to use. And the same phone for possibly the life of the house. Now you buy new one every year. Or sooner. Only it isn’t a phone, it is a GPS, MP3, Video Game, PDA, Video Camera. And where does it come from? JAPAN! From which it is shipped overseas on container ships that measure fuel use in gallons to the mile, not miles to the gallon. Just like so many of the other little indulgences that cost you so little.

You think giving up your cell phone is going to be a sacrifice? You are in for a shock when you find out what you are really going to have to give up.

I live in the state of Washington where there is no personal income tax. They just tax everything else. Property taxes, sales tax, highway taxes, vehicle taxes, and most of all gasoline taxes. The principle application of the money taken in from the gasoline tax is to fund highway projects. Seattle has a viaduct that is going to fall down if they don’t take it down, and there is heated debate about rebuilding it, replacing it with a tunnel, or enlarging existing surface routes to accommodate the traffic. The state ferry system, one of if not the most extensive in the world has aging ships that are failing left and right. One route was closed to vehicles for months and now has only limited vehicle service, others are similarly limited.

As I do not need to tell anyone, gasoline prices have gone up a bit recently and the state is finding that people are driving less. Which means, taa daa, less gasoline tax revenue. People are holding onto cars longer because they do not have the room in their budget for a new(er) car. And while I am sure they are benefiting from the increase in property values, there is certainly less land being developed, and far fewer new homes being built. As an out of work carpenter, I can attest to that!

So now the state government is scratching its head wondering where to get the money from. The same government that squandered years and millions of dollars, exercised eminent domain to purchase real estate, and businesses for a light rail system. A project they subsequently canceled and then declined to return the real estate they commandeered, even at market prices.

Just had to get that off my chest.

Kafka Joke:

A man walks into his doctor’s office and says, “Doc, I woke up this morning and just felt terrible. I’m not sure how to describe it except to say I just don’t feel like myself.’

“Okay,” his doctor replies, “We’ll run some tests and see what comes up.”

About an hour later the nurse calls the man back into the doctor’s office. The doctor says, “We have the results of your tests, and, well, there is good news and bad news. Which would you like first?”

“Gosh doctor,” the man answers, “I just feel so terrible I need something to pick me up, so make it the good news first I guess.”

“Okay, I have no explanation for this, but some how you have turned into a beatle.”

“My God That is the GOOD news doctor? What can possibly be the bad news?”

“Well,” the doctor replies, “Its Ringo.”

Disclaimer: no beetles, or beatles were harmed during the creation of this joke, any similarities to persons living or dead, or metamorphosed is purely coincidental.

Associated Press reports today (July 10th, 2008) President Bush signed a new law giving immunity from prosecution to telecommunication companies for their part in warrant less wire tapping. According to Democrats.Com 73% of Americans object to this as a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which reads:

http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/114

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The Fourth Amendment only applies to governmental actors. It does not guarantee a right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by private citizens or organizations. And this current bill applies freedom from prosecution to corporations that under American law exist as individuals, so the current bill does not violate the Fourth amendment as it would seem to be interpreted.

But as I perceive the objections to this bill it is that people feel their privacy is being violated. Well, first, the Constitution grants no right to privacy. But what if it did? According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project 75% of Americans say they own cell phones. Cell phones which work on radio waves that can be intercepted with pretty basic equipment. Shortwave radios have been known to pick up cell phone transmissions, so what privacy can you truly expect when you are talking on one? I don’t even need to go that far to break down your so called right to privacy. How many times have you sat and listened to someone else’s life unfolding in a restaurant, while shopping, or on a public sidewalk. And have you always scrupulously removed yourself from a public place to use your phone, or do you wait until you are in your car?

http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/300/press_release.asp

Would that be your GPS equipped car? Or your GPS equipped phone? From either of which you can be easily located almost anywhere on Earth unless you intend to live in a cave and do nothing but watch cable TV. Of course there is a phenomenon of living in constant darkness where time seems to stretch out, or compress and you lose touch with the actual time of day as determined by the position of the sun in the sky, so you may have to TIVO some of your favorite shows to make sure you get to see them. Oh, you didn’t know that TIVO is sending information back to your cable provider about what shows you watch, what commercials you watch, what commercials you skip? Well, it is.

I have sat in a public place with my Bluetooth equipped cell phone, or PDA and just for having nothing better to do, scanned for other bluetooth devices that were within range, and turned on. Want to know what I found? Can you even buy a laptop computer that is not equipped with wireless transmission anymore? Can you go into a library or a coffee shop that does not offer you a wireless hook up? I see there are entire cities attempting to, or offering wireless service city wide. All these transmissions are interceptible.

When was the last time you shopped on Amazon, or ordered a movie from Netflix? Have you ever noticed in the recommendations based on what choices you make often contain movies you have already seen or books you have already read? That same software evaluates every advertisement you look at on the internet, everything you click on, and targets you with the advertisements you are most likely to respond to. But that is just a convenience so you don’t have to go looking for the things you want, they will come to you.

In the county I live in , I can get online and tell anyone else in the county how much they paid for their property, what the taxes are, who is named on the mortgage. I bet I can do it where you live. Your credit card company watches everything you buy, and every place you buy it. They do this so when something anomalous happens, like your card being used in New York City a few hours after you used it in Seattle, they can alert you that you have been a victim of identity theft. (This happened to me.) Yes it is a protection, but is it a violation of privacy?

Walk through a grocery store, or get online to any blog site and see how many newspapers, magazines, and blog articles are based on what the celebrity of the hour is having at Starbucks, and who they are having it with. Paparazzi make thousands of dollars for just the right picture that will show up on the cover of one tabloid or another, or any of a score of TV shows dedicated to, and reaping huge profits from the invasion of privacy of celebrities. Some people call it investigative journalism. If I were among the celebrity crowd I would be laughing on the floor at the average American whining about invasions of privacy.

In the end, I expect when the government receives all these recordings what they will mostly get is thousands of hours of people asking “Can you hear me now?” So they better regulate the coverage that cell providers offer, and the quality of service if they want to get anything out of this bill.

“When I Am an Old Woman I Shall Wear Purple
with a red hat that doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me..”
Jenny Joseph

I read this poem and it makes me angry. I understand the message Jenny Joseph is trying to impart and in and of itself there is nothing about the poem that bothers me. What I find wrong is the complete lack of understanding it engenders and the bastardization to which it has been put. I refer to the Red Hat Society who have co-opted this piece and completely reversed its meaning to suit their own lack of ability to live up to the challenge and the message contained with in the verses.

To be clear, no Red Hat has ever to my knowledge beaten me to a parking spot, or cut in line in front of me, or kicked my dog. In fact I really don’t concern myself with them in any way. What bothers me is the blindness of people who through total lack of self awareness, or inability for self examination think they are accomplishing one thing while clearly doing the opposite.

Here is a poem about a person who has realized they live their life by convention and common sense, allowing what is perceived to be the norm to rule their decisions, and by that surrender having their decisions made for them. But there comes a time when you realize it is never too late to become an individual, to think for yourself, a time you can throw caution to the wind and do a thing for its own sake.

And what is done with that message? The Red Hat Society. A more clueless group of societal sheep I fear to envision. A group who has taken the concept of wearing clothing that makes a statement about individuality and turned it into the very uniform of conformity. In fact to attend one of their meetings, you must show up in that uniform, so say the non-rules of the Society as posted on their website. When in fact the clothing in this poem should be taken as a metaphor for that part of ourselves that is seen by others and conceals some deeper part of our personality.

Within the poem, at its ending it states that it is not about an old woman changing her ways, but a woman in self examination of her mid life, and where she would like her life to go when she inevitably grows older. It goes on to say that at whatever age you begin to realize that old age will come to all, that is the time to begin to express yourself. I quote:

“But maybe I ought to practice a little now?
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.”

And yet this group of would be free thinking women make rules that restrict others from wearing their uniform should they not be an arbitrarily chosen age. You must be fifty years or older to qualify to become an individual according to the Red Hats. Younger than that and you are only permitted a pink hat and lavender dress. So do they define fifty as old? I know fifty, sixty, or seventy year olds who might easily dispute that, and by not needing to be told how to be an individual, demonstrate it as well.

At the turn of the last century women wearing the physically restrictive clothing of the Victorian Era spoke out, demonstrated and sometimes went to prison for the right to have their voices heard. The right to vote. In the middle of the last century women protested a subtler damping of their voices by consent of societal norms, and at times demonstrated that by the destruction of what they saw as a symbol of the restraints society had placed on them. They burned their bras. What is the legacy those women fought for? Playing pretend at being an individual, and squandering that voice by gathering in self congratulatory groups and all dressing the same to attend tea parties and swap meets.

I should like to add a quote from another poem on aging. One written by Dylan Thomas from the perspective of seeing his father in old age.

“Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”

And I do not wonder what he was wearing when he wrote that.

On June 30th, 2012, there will be a bio-engineer, or laboratory, or someone richer by 1 Million dollars if they can produce chicken meat without producing a chicken. PETA, People for Ethical Treatment of Animals, has offered this amount for the purpose of spurring research into development of a source of in-vitro meat protein that is indistinguishable from that which comes from the slaughter of an animal. This should not be mistaken for a vegetarian meat substitute. This is actual animal muscle tissue that has been grown under laboratory conditions, but never been part of a living animal.

This may sound like the realm of a bad science fiction movie where things are about to horribly wrong and the meat experiment escapes to wreak havoc on a space station, or small rural town but in fact it goes on even today. I am curious what it is going to accomplish if someone succeeds. In the first place what is one million going to buy in another four years? A full gas tank for your RV if you are lucky. What is the future of these animals we are replacing should they be replaced with a lab cultured substitute?

Lets look at the price of success in this venture. Assume that by 2020 in vitro meat has become completely safe and indistinguishable from its furry or feathered counterpart. Not that it will need to be, because it will only be a matter of years before there is no one left alive who has ever eaten anything with which to make a comparison. But it is 2020 and there is no longer a need for beef cattle, chickens, or farm bred meat animals. Where will they go? These are animals that have no other purpose than to be bred for meat, and other by-products for which we already have acceptable substitutes. We have totally removed them from a natural environment and selectively bred them for thousands of years to serve one purpose, and now we are erasing that purpose. Are we inducing their extinction?

Or, can we turn these animals back out to the wild? Will we create nature preserves for chickens? Pigs? What is the natural environment of the domestic sheep or cow? Species that are given regimens of drugs to protect them from disease which comes naturally wherever overpopulation is a problem will not have developed immune systems to protect them in the wild from disease they have never come in contact with. Will there be mass die-offs of herds and flocks in the wild?

That will not be the case, because there will always be a need for these animals. A very few of them, just enough to keep the breeds alive. We have learned from cloning that cells taken from an animal will reproduce, but are not perfect reproductions. As with a xerox machine, little errors creep in to the process and make the reproductions less and less accurate, making the protein that derives from those lines less and less palatable. There will always be a need for new lines of cells, so we will keep just enough of them alive to breed new lines. And those we keep will have to be very closely protected because they now represent the entire source of meat protein for the human race. They will have to be kept safe from disease and natural disaster. Even more selectively bred than they are today.

How vulnerable does that make our food supply? Will we have eradicated terrorism in the next decade? Two? Will there be a movement to remove meat protein from the diet all together for the sake of freeing these animals kept under tightly controlled living conditions? Where will they go then? Zoos?

What of the person, or people who succeed? Will they be granted a patent on the process? Or the product? It happens today that GMO’s, Genetically Modified Organisms, are patententable. Crops that are altered become property even though they may be carried in seed form by wildlife or the wind and propagate far away. Where ever they might choose to randomly grow, those plants belong to those who hold the patent. With success and a patent, will those who succeed in growing this meat own the genetics of the animals from which it comes? Will all those animals and all their offspring now be the sole property of a laboratory and whoever may have those animals in custody be forced to give them up? Have charges pressed against them? It happens now with GMOs.

These exaggerations are not outrageous, in fact they are well within the bounds of solutions we adopt in the present. Though I don’t intend them seriously. In fact what they are really about is questions. Not even necessarily the questions I am asking, because those I thought up simply to pursue a certain logical, if exaggerated conclusion. But what will be the fate of animals who no longer have a purpose? Likely they will still be bred for food for the very wealthy who can afford it, while everyone else eats the stuff that is not only bought off the shelf, but grown on the shelf.

If we are lucky they will find a way to put a single cell in a can, load the mainly empty cans onto trucks, and by the time it reaches your grocery store, the can will be full. Think of the savings in energy.