Trust the expert

Posted on by
Reply

A recent article I was reading gave me the impression that there is a line of thought out there that things like Wikipedia are destructive to the idea of “expert opinion.”  Apparently some may put more weight in the online resource than they otherwise might in what an expert might have to say.  Whether or not Wikipedia is a causal factor in that – I’m not sure.  But the thought occurred to me that expert opinion is something that should be weighed anyway.

These days I see many people touted as experts.  They are on the news channels constantly – they have titles and credientials – and they have opinions.  Granted some also have facts, and that’s always a welcome addition.  But the world around us isn’t so black and white that we can always blindly trust because there are letters behind a person’s name or a title associated with it.

I’ve heard one too many expert opinions that are blatantly biased.  We’ve all heard experts say the most ridiculous things.  We know that even the most highly educated among us does dumb things from time to time.  We’re all human, and making mistakes is part of our existance.  Shit happens, right?

So my point is that I don’t think that the internet has changed whether or not we hold the opinions of experts in the highest regard.  I think the real point is that we need to be aware that not everything said to us should be taken at face value.  It’s not that we can’t trust anyone, but that we should be careful who we trust.  Because someone else has placed trust in a person doesn’t always mean that we should as well.

I forget

Posted on by

I swear sometimes I think I have memory problems…

I’ve never had a great memory.  I recall strange and sometimes unimportant things.  I admire those who have photographic memories.  But my memory sometimes seems like an old stick of RAM that has become outdated.  Maybe it just won’t fit any more without purging something out.  And occasionally that something is important…

At work today we had a visit.  During this visit I have to be able to speak to various elements of the business, and generally most of the information somehow works its way out of my head.  But during a key question I completely lost my mind – complete brain fart and I could not recall the answers I needed.  For a few moments I’m pretty sure I turned red and looked the fool.

I wonder if there’s an app for this.  Maybe like a Brain Dump app that I could quickly enter and recall information.  I’m sure there’s more memory on my iPhone than in my head.

Then again, maybe not.  But what was I writing about??

E-cigs: No smoke, no tobacco

Posted on by

I see that Utah is working towards a ban on e-cigarette use in public places.  The bill apparently would ban both e-cigarettes and hookahs…. ok.  Besides that interesting pairing, the article in the Deseret News includes the following:

“However, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, e-cigarettes contain harmful levels of nicotine, a substance the agency classifies as a stimulant drug.

“There is no safe level of tobacco smoke,” said David Neville, spokesman for the Tobacco Prevention and Control Program at the Utah Department of Health.

With tobacco cigarettes a user generally knows how much nicotine is being consumed. “They know if they are a half-a-pack-a-day smoker. When it comes to an electronic cigarette, you just don’t know. You just keep on smoking,” Neville said.”

While I agree with Mr. Neville on his first statement, I don’t understand why he is applying it to e-cigs.  Either the statement is out of context, or this spokesman is ignorant about e-cigs.  With an e-cig, there is neither tobacco nor smoke.

His second statement is also more false than true.  Many ecig users know exactly how much nicotine is in the juice they use.  Bottles are labeled and sold with either the milligrams or percentage of nicotine in the solution.  The advantage in this case is that the user can regulate and even step down as they chose.   For instance when I first started using ecigs I used 18-24mg juice (which is about 1.8-2.4%).  Since I am able to choose, I now have stepped down to 0-12mg.  I can elect to use zero nicotine or a reduced amount.  Can’t do that with a cigarette.

Ecigs are used by a significant number of people these days, and many have relied on them to help them kick the cigarette habit.  So my recommendation for public health professionals, spokesmen, and other government folks is to get more information.  I’m rather tired of the one-sided and often ignorant rhetoric.  It doesn’t make sense and it’s not generally good public policy.

(Sources: Deseret News, GrimmGreen.com)

Sincerely held beliefs…

Posted on by

I’ve been trying to stay away from posting anything about politics recently, and as you can see I’ve posted nothing at all.  This is not to say I haven’t had any non-political thoughts.  But I apparently forget them when it comes time to sit down and write something.  But something has been brewing in my head, and I saw a news story that I had to post about.

Apparently several states (including my own lovely Ohio) has filed a lawsuit against the government regarding the religious institutions and birth control coverage.  I’m amazed this is a topic at all, but the rhetoric around it has been interesting.  Most recently I saw the following quote:

“Government has no business forcing religious institutions and individuals to violate their sincerely held beliefs,” Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement Thursday.

So then if a group says that its sincerely held beliefs include that black people shouldn’t have health care, then that would be okay too?  Or let’s just say a severely secular business owner said everyone has to be available to work on major holidays, then that would be okay?  I’m not the biggest fan of the “slippery slope” argument, but in this case where does the line get drawn?  And whose line will it be?  I just think that deserves some public thought and discussion.

In other news, some politicians in Virginia do think it’s ok to violate a woman through her vagina.  This is small government?

(source: CNN)

The Melissa Harris-Perry Show

Posted on by

I’m already tired of the presidential race.  Just watching the circus over the past few months, while entertaining at first, has devolved into something that only frustrates me.   The recent discussion about birth control just put me over the edge.  And I have nothing to do with birth control…

A light somewhere in the tunnel might be a new show that I saw publicized on Twitter.  It pointed to a blog for Melissa Harris-Perry’s new show on MSNBC.  Leaning left as I do, I like several of the shows on MSNBC.  I used to like Keith Olbermann’s show, but he sometimes went off the deep end.  The one I like the most now would be Rachel Maddow’s show which I often like because she is funny as well as sharp as a tack.  The funny makes it bearable.

Melissa’s new show seems to promise something I’ve wanted to see for awhile now.  Her blog says that, “We will quiet the noise of the echo chambers so that we can hear the many different voices that are bouncing around in there… We will ask people to leave the talking points at home so that we can really talk to each other.”  The entry recalls a class at Clark University where students had to discuss difficult topics.  ”Witnessing Clark students having difficult dialogues was a reminder of what is possible we embrace the complicated and surprising process of listening to each other even when we disagree.”

I whole-heartedly would love a show where people actually do listen – where people get beyond the issues themselves and find the common humanity in what we all believe.  Funny saying this here, but leaving the rhetoric out of the equation sometimes helps us to see the real issues and thus allow us to find real solutions.

I will be DVRing the show to see how it turns out.  And as a fan of Melissa’s appearances on The Rachel Maddow Show, I wish her the best of luck in finding something so uncommon on TV as listening.

(source: MSNBC)

Light-painted vase

Posted on by

This one photo took about 28 shots to get right, or at least close to how I wanted it to turn out. I saw an article about Lightpainting on the Nikon USA website and I decided to give it a try. You start with a dark room, a flashlight, some object you want to shoot, and a long shutter time. This one was about 15 seconds, f8, ISO400, and a 40mm Nikkor lens.

I started by setting everything up. I positioned everything where I wanted and then got the focus locked in and set to manual. Turned out the lights and clicked the shutter. While the shutter was open I used the flashlight to light up exactly where I wanted to. The first 27 shots were less than perfect. This one was right on. I cropped it just a bit and darkened the shadows although only slightly – nothing significant.

I’m going to have to play around with this technique a bit more and have some fun.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

State of gay marriage in Ohio

Posted on by

An article in today’s News Herald called “Where does gay marriage stand in Ohio?” quotes several Ohio legislators about their opinions about the institution in our state. It’s unfortunate that they don’t seem to be aware of the facts or how this issue impacts their constituents.

Rep Ron Young is quoted indicating that he has concerns about changing the bedrock of our society. While I can respect that to many this is perceived as a major change, I have to ask what impact will it have on society? What impact have we seen in other places where gay marriage is legal? The problem I have with this representative’s sentiment is that it’s not based on facts. It’s one thing to express your apprehension, but why not find out the facts instead of remaining “concerned?”

Rep Kenny Yukon indicates that because 52% of Ohioans believe in equal rights in the form of civil unions equal marriage rights it won’t be on his radar. Since when do we believe that equality should be dependent on what percentage of people are concerned about it? This is a real issue with real effects on real people.

The other issue he puts forward is that since we need jobs in the state we should focus on that instead of civil rights issues. While I find this to be the perfect example of a blatant excuse to avoid the issue, I think that statement is just wrong. Unmarried couples who may have an unemployed partner have a more difficult time taking care of each other because of the lack of rights and privileges that come with marriage. For instance if one wants to cover a partner with health insurance, that help is taxable under state and federal laws. Not helpful in an economy that makes it harder to take care of oneself.

The truth is that the state of gay marriage in the State of Ohio is pretty poor. We have no protections except the standard ones that two friends could put together. And that all costs more than a marriage license. That’s on my radar.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad