The Atomic Spud

Now I Really Am the Atomic Spud

2012-02-11T09:05:00.000-07:00

A few months ago I started getting odd pains after eating. The symptoms weren't like those of the acid reflux I've had for most of my life (and can control most of the time with Prilosec), but they did seem similar to the pains my wife had been having off and on for a few years. We found out last year that she had a pyloric ulcer as well as gallbladder disease; the former was treated with expensive medications and the latter was taken care of through gallbladder removal surgery. Since we didn't know which of her symptoms was caused by what ailment, we really couldn't say if my problem was caused by an ulcer (pyloric ulcers are the result of bacterial infection and can be spread from person to person) or by a gallbladder problem.

A visit to the doctor a few weeks ago indicated that I don't have an ulcer. A simple blood test showed that I didn't have the bacterial infection and the description of my symptoms didn't seem to match up with those of an ulcer. According to the doctor, certain symptoms I've been having are characteristic of a malfunctioning gallbladder. The doctor explained to me that the first technique we could use to confirm his suspicions would be to look for gallstones using ultrasound. If that came up negative, we could monitor the gallbladder's function with a HIDA scan. He warned me that it's possible for both techniques to yield negative results and to still have gallbladder disease. Last week I had a sonogram that showed that I didn't have any gallstones. On Friday morning I went in for the HIDA scan. I came out of the scan radioactive.

Yep, that's me

Prior to a HIDA scan, the patient is injected with the radioactive isotope Technetium-99m (Tc-99m). The Tc-99m eventually ends up in the person's bile and can be seen passing through the gallbladder with a radiation-detecting scanner. In my case, I was also injected with a medicine near the end of the scan that exercises the gallbladder as if I had eaten a fatty meal. The function of the organ was monitored and I was instructed to tell the technician whether or not the injection recreated the pain.

Hours of gamma radiation-emitting fun

I have yet to receive the results of my scan, but the final injection caused a relatively mild form of the discomfort I've been having. As for the radioactivity, I was injected with 6 millicuries (mCi) of Tc-99m. Six thousandths of a curie seems like a lot to someone who typically works in units of picocuries (pCi), or trillionths of a curie. Of course, the isotopes I work with emit a lot more energy per curie than Tc-99m. The relatively low energy of the gamma photon emitted when Tc-99m transitions to Tc-99 is much of the reason why this form of Technetium is used for medical diagnostics.

Anyway, if my experience is anything like those of the people who received the diagnostic, happened to have a Geiger counter at home, and posted the results on the Internet (oddly enough, I'm not one of those people), I probably left the clinic with an on-contact radiation reading between 20 and 30 millirem/hr. (Objectively, this is not a very high level, but at work we would consider implementing certain controls when dealing with an item emitting that level of radiation.) Tc-99m has a half-life of 6 hours, meaning that the radiation level is halved every six hours. The effective levels may drop even faster since the radioisotope will also leave the body through the urine. Given my line of work and the caution with which we treat radiation and contamination, it's amusing to think that I am currently an unmarked, walking radiation source and that I'm simply dumping radioactivity into the sewers every time I flush the toilet.

Most sources suggest that I'll have received about 500 millirem of exposure by the time the Tc-99m is out of my system. Although this is not an insignificant level of exposure over such a short period of time, it is still far from being dangerous. It is also a lot higher than the amount I've received at my facility since I started there several years ago. Occupational radiation exposure is monitored separately from that of other sources (e.g., medical treatments). Thus, I won't be allowed to wear a dosimeter when I go back to work next week until I'm scanned by a radiological controls technician and am declared to have returned to background radiation levels. I look forward to finding out my radiation level on Monday so I can back-calculate the level I reached when I was first injected.

I wonder what super powers I'll get

Nerd-Hating

2012-02-05T02:31:00.000-07:00

The other day I was visiting one of my favorite political websites, Pajamas Media, where I found an article in their "PJ Lifestyle" section entitled "Five Reasons Star Wars Actually Sucks". Much of the article is a fairly inoffensive (and entirely unoriginal) rant about the derivative nature of the Star Wars saga's plot, the extreme degree to which Star Wars has been merchandised ("George Lucas is a plastic toy manufacturer who makes mediocre movies on the side"), the low quality of several of the films, and how much the author, Kathy Shaidle, generally dislikes the Star Wars franchise.

An Internet critic who complains about Star Wars
and George Lucas? How utterly unheard of!

Despite being a huge Star Wars fan, I have absolutely no problem with Ms. Shaidle griping about the franchise on her blog. It's her right to dislike sci-fi in general and Star Wars in particular. The fact that she dislikes it doesn't affect my enjoyment of Star Wars in any way. As for me, I strongly dislike professional sports and have no compunction about expressing my views on the topic. However, I recognize that there are many people, if not a majority, who greatly enjoy sports. Although I don't share their interest and can't understand the appeal of watching televised sports, I have no problem with fans in general or as individuals as long as their passion doesn't become unhealthy or destructive (which I've seen before). Although I dislike football, I know that the bulk of football fans are decent people who aren't anything like the grotesque, Homer Simpson-like caricatures seen in sitcoms.

Unfortunately, Ms. Shaidle doesn't give people like myself the benefit of the doubt and has decided that Star Wars fans are a worthless lot. Not content to merely condemn Star Wars itself, Shaidle directly attacks the fans on a personal level. She then goes as far as to belittle pretty much anyone with geeky interests:

Successful, mature men do not play computer games, attend "cons", and get excited about overrated science fiction movies from the 1970s.

Come on, all the conservative boys who’ve read this far:

Do you imagine Victor Davis Hanson is some kind of font of boring zombie lore?

Do you think Mark Steyn wastes his spare time playing World of Warcraft? (Trick question. Mark Steyn doesn’t have any spare time.)

No, these men have careers and families, here on planet earth.

In describing the brother of the man who designed the Stormtrooper armor seen in Star Wars, Shaidle says:

He shared his brother’s passion for militaria, so since the 1960s, Andrew Mollo has worked as a historical consultant to the movies, with an expertise in military uniforms.

In other words: Andrew Mollo is a guy who has a lot in common with thousands of Star Wars fans, except his job does not require him to wear a name tag.

I find her lack of respect disturbing

I'm not even sure where to begin. How about the statement that "Successful, mature men do not play computer games, attend 'cons', and get excited about overrated science fiction movies from the 1970s"? Shaidle's prejudice and contempt for people with interests she doesn't share are on full display in this single statement. Note that she doesn't single out those who can't or won't achieve a productive adulthood and instead latch onto something like Star Wars or World of Warcraft to avoid reality. In my experience, people for whom their hobby becomes a way of life rather than a pastime are given a lot of attention but are relatively few in number. And it's not the fact that they're sci-fi or fantasy fans that makes them this way. I have seen sports nuts, avid hunters, and inveterate outdoorsmen engage in similar behavior. What is offensive is Shaidle's blanket declaration that no "successful, mature men" could possibly play computer games or engage in sci-fi or fantasy fan activities. In her narrow worldview, me and my ilk are all lonely, unmarried losers who could only get the kind of job that requires us to wear name tags.

I bet most of these geeks have more respect for people
with different interests than Kathy Shaidle does

Unfortunately, I've found that many people think like Ms. Shaidle. In response, I would point to the fact that the vast majority of my friends, most of my fellow alumni, many of my coworkers, and I play video games, attend cons where possible, and get excited about science fiction movies. The majority of us are successful and mature where it matters. Many of us are happily married, own homes, and have children. Given her prejudice, I'd guess that Shaidle doesn't want to know how many of us 'unsuccessful' and 'immature' types work with nuclear power. Nor does she seem willing to consider all those 'unsuccessful' and 'immature' people who design and maintain the technology that she enjoys and upon which modern life depends. And I doubt she's even thought about the number of 'unsuccessful' and 'immature' computer scientists, engineers, and programmers who helped make her blog possible. Only through arrogance and willful blindness can a lifestyle blog author declare that we can't possibly be successful or mature simply because she finds our interests "boring" or pathetic.

It's too bad I don't have a career
and family here on planet Earth.
Oh, wait...

What horrible offense have we committed that makes Shaidle and others like her feel justified in libeling us and reducing us to some pathetic and odious stereotype? After a nine hour work day (not counting over two hours of commuting time), I enjoy coming home, spending some time with the kids, and then sitting down to paint Warhammer 40,000 figures. Every other weekend five of us get together to spend a few hours playing 40K. On top of that, most of us enjoy science fiction and fantasy and play video games. However, in stark contrast to Ms. Shaidle's portrayal of our kind, there are seven engineering or science degrees between us. All of us have mortgages, are married, and have children or will soon have children. And all of us have a good career in the nuclear industry. We all wear name tags at work, but they're in the form of security badges. Yes, Ms. Shaidle, even nerds can have "careers and families, here on planet Earth". Does the fact that we enjoy geeky hobbies nullify everything else we do and accomplish? If we were to get together to watch a football game instead would we somehow become mature and successful? I have another friend who has an engineering career, is interested in politics and history, and made more than the average Idaho family in his first year out of college. He also plays video games, has a huge comic book collection, and wields a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of Marvel superheroes. Do his interests make him an immature and unsuccessful loser?

How can Shaidle sleep at night knowing that there are so many
unsuccessful and immature men involved in nuclear power?

My geeky T-shirts, 40K models, and Star Trek books don't hurt anyone. I don't force my Godzilla DVD collection (most of it in Japanese with subtitles) on anybody. I buy the toys and action figures that Shaidle makes fun of, but I do so on a budget that also covers all our bills, contributes to my retirement plan, and provides for religious donations. I don't make fun of those who don't share my interests, nor do I sneer at those who enjoy things that I don't. And there are millions of people like me. For the most part we leave other people alone to pursue their interests in peace. Why don't we deserve the same courtesy?

It's All About Your Mindset

2012-01-27T13:52:00.001-07:00

Despite the poor economy, several engineers at my company have recently found other jobs. Each time someone leaves, the morale seems to dip a little. You can't go a few minutes without overhearing hushed conversations about how much greener the grass is outside the company, that our company/management/policies drive employees away, that such-and-such's new job is going to be so much better, etc. This is on top of the constant complaining that you hear from the chronically disgruntled who are bound and determined to be dissatisfied with every aspect of their job and who seem to believe that it's their duty to make others unhappy as well. From what I've heard from other professionals (and from the impression I get from Dilbert), this problem is far from being unique to my company.

When employee disgruntlement reaches critical mass...

Here's my confession; up until about three years ago I was part of those types of conversations. I kept a stiff upper lip for the first six months or so of my job, but I eventually allowed myself to be influenced by the attitudes of a number of coworkers, both newer employees as well as veterans. They were angry with the bureaucracy (there's a lot of that in the nuclear industry), with various company policies, with the management, with the pay, etc. One coworker who had been with the company for 25+ years took it upon himself to personally tell each new guy to "do yourself a favor and quit". Others were less overt, but they still grumbled continuously. A large chunk of each Friday was dedicated to unmitigated complaining. The effect of all this was that half of the engineers who started around the same time as me quit within less than two years. I had tried to join them; at my one year mark I had several resumes out and was doing job interviews with other companies. Now I'm very glad that none of those resumes or interviews went anywhere.

Except for an increase in responsibilities, very little has changed about my job. However, I've since gone from despising my job to enjoying it. The only real change was in my own behavior; I made a conscious decision to be grateful for the position I had (this is even easier to do in our current economy) and to take on a "can-do" attitude. Although this will swell his head a bit and I'll never hear the end of it, I have to admit that I was helped along this path by my friend and coworker, Bryce, who was also the one who introduced me to Warhammer 40K. Bryce showed me that your job is what you make of it. I saw that he could derive fulfillment by working as hard as he could and trying to make a difference regardless of roadblocks, uncooperative coworkers, or red tape. With his example of a positive attitude and his accomplishments, I saw that professional satisfaction and happiness are determined primarily by oneself.

Abraham Lincoln said that "Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be". This is as true about work as anything else. I decided to be happy with my job and feel like I've succeeded at it. In just a few years my professional life has changed entirely. I stopped looking for reasons to be miserable and now feel a strong loyalty toward the company and a sense of gratitude for my job and my responsibilities. I don't dread Monday mornings anymore; I look forward to another week to get things done. Of course, I rarely accomplish everything I need to, but that just ensures that there's rarely a dull moment. I can still get frustrated with coworkers or with the bureaucracy, but I've found it a lot more productive to suck it up and tell myself 'I'll get through this' than to gripe about the situation.

The following is what I learned while on the path to enjoying my job:

1. Venting doesn't work
I have never vented my frustrations and felt better afterward. Nor have I seen others do so. It is completely and utterly non-productive as it simply reinforces negative feelings and attitudes while encouraging a (mostly false) sense of helplessness. Venting to others usually has the effect of either annoying them or encourages them to vent as well, resulting in a morale-destroying cycle. What I've witnessed over and over again has been angry employees bouncing their frustrations off each other and blaming everyone and everything else for their dissatisfaction. Participants in these discussions inevitably end up in a fouler mood and with even less appreciation for having a secure job in a shaky economy.

2. New employees are watching the older employees
A word of advice to more experienced/veteran employees: your attitude strongly affects your younger coworkers. The new guys have recently chosen to throw in their lot with the company. This is a serious decision that is hard to back out of. Your attitude will affect how they feel about the company and how they view their professional future. Whether you like it or not, new employees will look to you as a mentor and an example. If you are constantly complaining about the job, the management, etc., your attitude will be exaggerated in the newer employees who don't have enough experience to tell them otherwise. I cannot stress this point enough: DO NOT POISON THE NEW EMPLOYEES' MORALE! If you can't muster a good attitude, for the new guys' sakes keep your disgruntlement to yourself and let them decide for themselves whether or not the job is a good one.

3. Follow the golden rule and treat others as you would want to be treated
Unless you like to have people deal impatiently with you, to treat every interaction with you as an inconvenience, to yell at you, or to refuse to return your phone calls or emails, don't treat others this way. The simple act of returning a coworker's phone call as quickly as possible can go a long way toward making the workplace a lot less stressful. For every half-dozen or so fellow employees who let me down there is at least one individual whose work ethic, competence, and professionalism makes my job infinitely easier. Those people inevitably end up at the top of my list of people to commend to their managers or to help out if they ask for it. Much of a person's attitude towards his or her job is determined by the environment created by fellow employees. Do your best to make it a good environment and others just might reciprocate.

4. Do your job to the best of your ability
Throughout industry, a lot of young engineers are dismayed to find that very little of what they do involves cutting edge design work. In fact, engineers often do a surprising amount of writing. Although I do some limited designing, most of my job would be better described as process design and procedure writing. Even if your job isn't quite what you thought it would be, remember that you're being paid to do it. At a minimum, it's only honest to do what you're being paid to do as well as you can. Even better is to take pride in your work and strive for continual improvement. I wouldn't have thought that I'd be writing as much as I do, but I've come to enjoy the challenge of producing the best procedures and processes possible, to be proud of my successes, and to learn from my failures.

I've come to despise phrases like "good enough for government work". It's not the government's work, or the company's work, it's your work, whether you like it or not. It reflects on you: on your professionalism, on your competence, and on your dedication. Too often I've seen employees attempt to divorce themselves from their work and thus try to avoid taking responsibility for the quality of their product. On this subject, the late Admiral H.G. Rickover said:

Responsibility is a unique concept. It can only reside and inhere in a single individual. You may share it with others, but your portion is not diminished. You may delegate it, but it is still with you. You may disclaim it, but you cannot divest yourself of it. Even if you do not recognize it or admit its presence, you cannot escape it. If responsibility is rightfully yours, no evasion or ignorance or passing the blame can pass the burden to someone else.

And:

When doing a job - any job - one must feel that he owns it, and act as though he will remain in that job forever. He must look after his work just as conscientiously, as though it were his own business and his own money. [...] Too many spend their entire working lives looking for the next job. When one feels he owns his present job and acts that way, he need have no concern about his next job.

I have yet to meet a satisfied employee whose work product was poor. Of course, I'm not saying that unhappy employees are necessarily unproductive since I've often seen good work come from otherwise dissatisfied employees. I will say, however, that those who hate their jobs and therefore try to justify doing poor work will never be happy, and that those who value the quality of their work have a better chance of eventually coming to tolerate (or even to enjoy) their job.

[from The Far Side by Gary Larson]

5. Job satisfaction takes personal effort
If you're waiting for your boss or the management to make you happy, then I can guarantee that you'll find disappointment in the future. If you think that a change in policy or an increase in pay will finally make your job worth the effort, then you're hopelessly self-deluded. I have yet to see a disgruntled employee become satisfied through the efforts of others. On the contrary, I have often seen managers go out of their way to improve employees' happiness only to be met with cynicism and ingratitude. You must decide to have a positive attitude. You have to work at it. You have to learn to stop whining and to start counting your blessings. It was only when I learned this lesson that things turned around for me. And from what I've seen in the lives of others around me, I think I can safely say that this principle extends beyond the workplace and into everyday life. The happiest people I know are not the ones with the least difficulties or challenges, they're the ones who have consciously decided to be happy.

Movie Review: Gamera vs. Guiron (1969)

2012-01-21T12:36:00.002-07:00

As much as I love MST3K, it's not as fun to watch it alone. My wife just doesn't understand why anyone would deliberately watch a bad film and my mother (my usual b-movie partner) lives in another state and can't visit as much as we'd like. Fortunately for me I've been able to get Bryce (a.k.a., "B" in previous posts) into the show, although he has cursed my name on several occasions for recommending certain movies.

Despite evidence of my poor taste in movies, Bryce has agreed to watch several episodes of the show with me. I own every volume of MST3K ever released, so I don't lack in movies to subject him to. We play Warhammer 40,000 every couple weeks, so we chose an off-week to watch the truly wretched Hobgoblins and Space Mutiny back to back. The following week we were scheduled to play 40K with Jon and Carl, so I came over a few hours before the game so that Bryce and I could watch Gamera vs. Guiron from the Mystery Science Theater 3000 vs. Gamera collection (i.e., Volume XXI). All I can say is: Bryce, I'm very, very sorry I made you see that... but not sorry enough that I won't do it again.

For those who aren't familiar with Gamera, imagine a giant bipedal flying turtle with tusks. The Daiei Motion Picture Company's early Gamera movies were effectively cheap knock-offs of Toho's Godzilla films from the same era. Like Godzilla, Gamera's first appearance featured him as a city-stomping, nearly indestructible prehistoric monster of the sort that us kaiju fans love. In subsequent movies, which were geared more towards younger viewers, he became a friend of children (kaiju fans generally do not like it when their city-stomping monster is turned into a friend of children). By the time of Gamera vs. Guiron, Gamera is using his ridiculous flying ability, wherein he pulls his legs into his shell and the resulting cavities emit jets of flame, to rescue children who get themselves into interplanetary mischief.

Joel and the 'Bots riffed five Gamera movies during their third season, all of which appear in Volume XXI. I chose to inflict Gamera vs. Guiron on Bryce since I'm pretty sure that it was the first MST3K I actually sat down to watch and was the episode that got me hooked on the show.

Gamera would never pass California's emissions standards

Now on to the plot, such as it is. Two boys, Akio and a gaijin named Tom whose presence in Japan is never commented on, explore an empty spaceship that has inexplicably landed on earth. No, we never find out why the spaceship was here. Anyway, the boys are whisked away when they accidentally activate the ship. As the ship flies off into space on some sort of preset course, the boys are threatened by a meteor shower. Luckily for them, Gamera arrives and bats away the meteors. This scene had Bryce simultaneously laughing and groaning. The effects are horrible, the flying Gamera model looks incredibly cheap, and the jets of flame appear to be scorching the model's rubbery shell at several points.

The ship ends up outpacing Gamera, Friend of Children (*ugh*) and takes the boys to "Terra"; Earth's long lost twin. Terra and Earth share an orbit but are always on opposite sides of the sun (the "Counter-Earth" is a well-worn sci-fi notion). Once there we behold a vast model... er, a vast city that is occupied by only two women. Apparently Terra is a planet on the brink: it is slowly freezing over and is constantly under attack by giant monsters. The women fight back by unleashing the dreaded (*snicker*) GUIRON; an odd-looking monster whose distinguishing feature is the giant Ginsu knife protruding from its head. Although the monster's head appears to have been designed for a creature that stands upright, it spends most of its time on all fours. This gives one the impression that poor Guiron is constantly looking for a dropped contact lens.

Despite the unusual physiology, Guiron just isn't a particularly interesting monster. It's certainly not as cleverly designed as many of Godzilla's nemeses such as King Ghidorah or Gigan. Even the notoriously cheap Megalon costume put in a better showing than this abomination. On a humorous note, it would appear that the costume people put a lot of the budget into making Guiron's and Gamera's eyes moveable, with the result being countless loving closeups of thrilling eye-moving action!

He slices, he dices!

Although the Terran women play nice at first, it turns out that their real plans for the boys is to "eat their brains raw(!)" ("What, no sides?" responds Joel) and to travel to earth in the spaceship, leaving Terra behind. Unfortunately for the brain-eating duo, Gamera arrives to rescue the boys. Our favorite tusked turtle ends up fighting Guiron over a period of several disappointingly short scenes. For every minute of kaiju action we get two or three of watching idiot children trying to evade evil alien women. But on the plus side we get to enjoy some of the worst translation and dubbing I've ever encountered in a Japanese film. It's thanks to the ineptness of American distributors that I insist on watching subtitled Japanese edits of daikaiju films whenever possible. Yes, this means that I'm a snob with regards to movies that feature stuntmen dressed in rubber monster suits destroying models of Tokyo. And yes, I do understand how weird this seems to most people.

Anyway, Guiron is one of those giant monsters that the villains guide with some sort of mind-control device. Anyone who has ever seen a monster movie knows that the mind-control device will be damaged or deactivated at some point and the monster will "ironically" destroy its master(s) in the resulting rampage. (Oops, that should have been preceded by a spoiler warning.) In the end, one Terran woman kills the other (with very little motivation, it seems), Guiron chops the spaceship in half with the second alien inside (thus killing the entire native population of Terra, yay!), and Gamera kills Guiron with a little help from a missile launched by the boys (the first and only useful thing those kids do during the whole movie). Gamera is able to weld the spaceship together with its fiery breath(!) and the giant turtle returns the boys safely home.

Oh, and there was also a whole subplot about how the boys' mothers won't believe the claims of Akio's little sister that their sons were carried off in a spaceship, but that part of the story was dull and didn't have giant monsters in it, so I kind of forgot about it until just now.

"Gamera is really neat, Gamera is filled with meat..."

Not being a connoisseur of Japanese-made giant monster films, Bryce called Gamera vs. Guiron one of the five worst movies he'd ever seen. Apparently the shabby costumes, boring subplots, poor dubbing, and absurd storyline didn't add up to fine cinema in his opinion. Obviously the movie isn't good by any objective standard, but I'd have to say that it doesn't even make my list of the top 20 worst movies I've suffered through. Admittedly, having been a kaiju fan since childhood biases me a bit. Maybe next time I'll torment Bryce with Monster A-Go Go or The Creeping Terror to give him some perspective. That would make him revise his list, although he probably wouldn't let me pick the movies anymore.

C- [the mere presence of giant monsters will save almost any movie from a lower score]

Movie Review: The Violent Years (1956)

2011-12-31T13:33:00.000-07:00

This Christmas I received Mystery Science Theater 3000 Volumes XXI and XXII. My mother and I have made it a tradition to watch at least one MST3K episode whenever my parents visit. On their first night in town we watched the awful Santa Claus Conquers the Martians and on their last night we watched the juvenile delinquent film The Violent Years (1956) written by Ed Wood.

The plot of The Violent Years is somewhat similar to I Accuse My Parents (1944), which was also an MST3K subject. In both films, a teenager ends up in a life of crime due to his or her parents' "neglect". Both films include lengthy (and I mean lengthy) lectures from a judge, with the majority of the action occurring as flashbacks.

I write "neglect" with quotation marks because neither set of parents is particularly bad, nor could you really say that they're at fault for what their offspring did. Young Jimmy Wilson's parents in I Accuse My Parents are often drunk and irresponsible, but they're never abusive. And Jimmy is actually a pretty good kid. His criminal activity mostly involves delivering and receiving packages for the owner of a nightclub where a girl he's trying to impress is the lead singer. Jimmy is never directly informed that their contents are illegal or ill-gotten. Jimmy doesn't even realize what is going on until near the end of the movie.

This situation is even more ludicrous in the case of The Violent Years' Paula Parkins. Paula's father is a newspaper chief and her mother is often busy with her charity work. For heaven's sake, dad is working like just about any other '50s father and mom is raising money for charity! How is this neglect? Paula is able to visit her father at the office and is given a warm welcome while mom usually seems to be around the house. Her parents obviously love her and are extremely generous. In fact, at one point Paula is given a blank check just in case the boy with whom Paula is about to go on date can't cover the evening's costs. Apparently her parents' worst offenses against her are that dad always gives her a new watch for her birthday that is often delivered by one of his reporters and mom always gets her a new car. Mike and the 'bots often remark on the truly "hellish life" Paula leads.

Unlike Jimmy, it turns out that Paula is a rotten apple from the start and is actually the leader of a gang of female hoodlums. Immediately after receiving the check and seeing mom out the door, Paula picks up the phone and arranges their next heist; the armed robbery of a gas station. Following the robbery, miscellaneous crimes ensue, including an attack on a man and his girlfriend. The girlfriend is left tied up with strips of her own dress (the girls need to learn better knot tying techniques since the girlfriend is able to escape within minutes) while the man is dragged into the forest and is further "attacked". Although this is an exploitation film, it was still released in 1956 and still had to get past the Hays Office. Thus, the nature of the attack is obvious but is never explicitly spelled out. However, it's not ruled out that Paula's "delicate condition" (I love '50s euphemisms) at the end of the film may be the result.

Although the gang is supposed to be the cause of a reign of terror, most of the film's running time is taken up with padding: the cops' inability to trace the robbers, Paula's use of her father's inside sources to discover where the police will be setting up traps for the gang, a pajama party, etc. All this time the film tries, and completely fails, to convince us that Paula became a criminal because of her parents. Her motivations seem to have less to do with uninvolved parents and more with thrill-seeking.

The climax of the film occurs when the woman to whom the girls sell their stolen goods gives them a job from a "foreign interest". Apparently this foreign interest is willing to pay a significant amount of money for the gang to vandalize a few schoolrooms. They are even told that they shouldn't go easy on any US flags they may find. This being the mid-fifties, it's pretty obvious that the unseen party is meant to be some sort of communist group. I'm not exactly fond of communism, but even I find it hilarious that the fact that the girls are willing to take a job from the Reds is meant to show that they have become truly irredeemable. It's also nonsensical. Why would communist infiltrators actually pay to have schoolrooms vandalized? The girls' contact is a small time fence that buys any jewelry they steal; why would she even have communist contacts? It goes without saying that the mystery commies are never heard from again.

The extremely tame trashing of the schoolroom includes knocking over chairs, throwing a globe out a window, throwing books on the floor, and *gasp* erasing the chalkboard (fiends!). I assume that the film's budget could only afford two panes of candy glass for the girls to break. Just as one of them goes to lay her hands on Old Glory, the cops arrive. The gang starts a shootout with the cops (over vandalism?), which results in the deaths of a cop and two of the girls. (Raise your hand if you knew that the girl who was about to destroy the flag was the first to get shot.) [Correction: on a second viewing of the movie, I realized that the one who was going to damage the flag was the second one to be shot. The first was the one that hated school.] The Violent Years taught me that you can take a fatal blast to the gut from a shotgun without getting any blood on your white shirt.

Paula and the other surviving gang member make a break for their contact's house. The contact is horrified that the girls killed a cop and threatens to call the police... with very predictable results. Eventually Paula and the other girl end up in another car chase, they crash into a storefront window, and the other girl is killed. Paula is treated for her wounds, after which she is tried for her crimes and is sentenced to life in prison. A short while later, Paula's parents visit her in the prison hospital where she cries that she doesn't want her child to be born in a place like that. Once she comes due, she gives birth to a healthy baby girl. Since this is a 1950s exploitation movie, the audience has to see that Paula gets her just desserts; she dies during childbirth for no apparent reason.

It is at this point that, with no small measure of despair, the viewer notices that there are still about 10 minutes or so left in the movie/MST3K episode. Now The Violent Years is not a long movie. According to IMDB, the film originally ran for about 65 minutes. The MST3K episode had to include the short A Young Man's Fancy (1952) just to meet the usual episode running time. That means that the film is about to end with a glut of padding that represents nearly 15 to 20% of the film's total length. This is pretty common in b-movies where the filmmakers were forced to insert last minute material into their movies to get them up to the 60+ minute running time that was typical for feature length films of the period.

In a monologue that could only have been written by Ed Wood, the judge denies the right of Paula's parents to take custody of her orphaned daughter, relegating her to a state home instead. The judge lectures the parents in a long and rambling discourse on parental responsibility, the importance of religion, and the need to discipline one's children (which includes the use of the "old fashioned woodshed"!). During this scene, the viewer is subjected to a montage of stock footage as well as highlights from all the gang's crimes (the aforementioned attack on the man and his girlfriend is given extra attention here). I hadn't noticed how much padding was spread throughout the film until the movie itself showed that all its exciting scenes could be compressed into a five minute time span. Only Mike and the 'bots make the movie bearable.

D+

An MST3K Christmas

2011-12-26T15:28:00.000-07:00

A few years ago I started a tradition of watching a Christmas-themed episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000 on Christmas night. This is the perfect way for self-loathing b-movie fans to punish themselves when they feel that Santa Claus has shown them too much leniency.

At first I would watch Santa Claus Conquers the Martians (1964), which was included in the MST3K Essentials Collection released in 2004 (it's now out of print and selling for about $68 used on Amazon.com). In 2009 they released MST3K Volume XVI, which included the Mexican-produced Santa Claus (1959). I tend to alternate between the two. It's one thing to be a regular viewer of bad movies, but when you ritualistically subject yourself to the same ones, it's possibly a sign of mental illness. Of the two films, I think Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is probably worse. When I watched Santa Claus this year, Mrs. Atomic Spud was only able to get through the first 15 minutes (and very nearly went insane in the process). I've been too kind to expose her to Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.

A movie where Santa doesn't
have the silliest costume

In Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, the Martians realize that their children have become absolutely joyless. They only seem to respond to television signals from Earth that depict the upcoming journey of Santa Claus. With the help of their robot (their awful, awful robot), the Martians kidnap Santa Claus and take him to Mars. It is during this scene where the film attempts to depict Santa as simultaneously innocent and wise while actually making him look befuddled and/or merely stupid. Santa seems relatively unconcerned that a "robot" *snicker* has burst into his shop, that the Martian rayguns appear to have paralyzed Mrs. Claus and the elves, or that he's being kidnapped by aliens. I'm sure that the filmmakers intended to show that Santa was unflappable and was confident that everything would work out for the best, but he just comes across as too stupid to really mind the occasional extraterrestrial abduction. Also along for the ride are two human children that inadvertently gave away the location of Santa's workshop.

The Martians' dreaded cardboard
and vacuum-hose robot

It's during this time that we meet the film's comic relief, Dropo. This character is the source of 90% of the pain delivered by the movie. Forcing myself to watch Dropo's antics annually/biennially is my penance for every time I ever teased my younger sister. In my brief review of Catalina Caper, I noted that MST3K avoided comedies because bad comedies, by definition, are not funny. Dropo is not funny. His capering is not funny, his pratfalls are not funny, and his "comic" misunderstandings and stupidity are not funny.

Anyway, Santa and the two children end up making toys for the Martian children, which makes them and Kimar (King of the Martians) very happy. However, Voldar, who tried to kill Santa Claus shortly after they kidnapped him, believes that this will make Martian children soft and weak and sabotages the toys. Voldar is eventually defeated after he abducts Dropo (who now dresses like his new hero, Santa Claus) believing that the imbecile is Santa himself. The plot is foiled and Voldar is subdued when he is pelted with toys (apparently the hailstorm of toys thrown by children was simply so overwhelming that he couldn't bring to bear his unholstered raygun). Dropo takes over for Santa on Mars (meaning that the Red Planet can have its own idiot in a red suit), Santa is allowed to return home, and the most important part of Christmas (i.e., getting presents from Santa) is saved.

Poor Leonard Hicks

The funniest thing about Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is how differently the actors portray their roles. Santa Claus (John Call) spends most of the time chuckling and treating his Martian captivity as just another amusing event (and never seems to notice that the villain is trying to kill him), Voldar (Vincent Beck) plays his villainous character as over-the-top as possible, and Dropo (Bill McCutcheon) nearly screams "LOOK HOW FUNNY I AM!" while being agonizingly unfunny. The poor Kimar (Leonard Hicks), on the other hand, plays his part entirely straight. He plays his role as the ruler of an alien civilization that has found itself in a crisis in an entirely serious manner. In other words, his presence in Santa Claus Conquers the Martians is incongruous with the rest of the film. He really should be playing the sympathetic alien in a '50s sci-fi invasion flick somewhat along the lines of Exeter in This Island Earth (1955). Either every other actor except Hicks realized how absurd the movie was and decided to ham it up, or Hicks was a consummate professional who would play any role, no matter how lame, to the best of his ability. I prefer to think it was the latter.

The bad Christmas
movie for 2011

Santa Claus teaches us that Claus' shop is actually in a palace atop a cloud somewhere well above the Earth's North Pole, that his reindeer are windup toys, that he employs children from around the world rather than elves, and that his greatest nemesis is the Devil. Santa uses a variety of machines that not only look in on children's behavior, but can actually spy on their dreams. (Raise your hand if you'd feel comfortable having your behavior judged by the content of your dreams.)

The first 10 to 15 minutes of the film present us with Santa playing tunes from a variety of nations on his pipe organ while his child laborers sing along in their native language. This excruciating sequence will make you wish you were listening to "It's A Small World" instead. And to make it worse, it's completely irrelevant to the plot. We will also get acquainted with the film's omniscient narrator, who simply won't shut up.

Finally, Santa prepares to leave on his annual journey, which gives us such gems as his windup mechanical reindeer. The reindeer are utterly bizarre and are more nightmarish than whimsical. We also find out that if Santa doesn't return to his palace by sunrise, the reindeer will turn to dust and Santa Claus will starve to death. In the meantime, one of the Devil's chief demons, Pitch, prepares to ruin Claus' mission. Although he says that he'll do this by tempting all the world's children into being bad, the least effective devil in Lucifer's army manages to convince a grand total of three brothers to throw rocks at a window and to hatch a plot to capture Santa. The devil's Plan B is apparently to delay Santa until sunrise (I believe this is a common technique for defeating vampires, too).

Apparently Santa's natural adversary is the Devil

We're later told that Santa visited all the other nations, although it seems that he spends his whole time in Mexico. While there he teaches the three naughty brothers a lesson (their plot to capture him fails without ever being entertaining), gives a little rich boy what he really wants for Christmas (he wants his parents to spend time with him rather than going to parties all the time), and finally gives little Lupita the doll she's always wanted. Pitch's attempt to stall Santa fails with some help from Merlin... wait a minute; Merlin? What does Merlin have to do with Santa Claus?

Despite the horrendous opening and utter weirdness throughout, Santa Claus isn't quite as bad as Santa Claus Conquers the Martians. Pitch is a ridiculous slapstick character, but he's not as bad as Dropo. Santa Claus doesn't always seem too bright, but unlike his Martian-conquering counterpart, he shows some wisdom every once in a while (particularly when he fulfills the rich boy's wish). And some of the scenes with Lupita are good enough that they deserve to be in a better movie. I also have to admit some bias; I have a soft spot for Mexican movies given the two years I spent in Veracruz as an LDS missionary. Oddly enough, despite the movie's 1959 release date, the interior of Lupita's house resembles nearly 75% of all the homes I visited in southern Mexico.

Happy Holidays Merry Christmas!

2011-12-24T12:32:00.000-07:00

It started as my Dad's pet peeve, and has since become mine. I do not celebrate "Holiday". Nobody celebrates "Holiday". Nobody's favorite holiday is "Holiday". Santa Claus does not bring "Holiday presents" in celebration of "Holiday". A "Holiday Tree" is an absurdity; no Western society that I'm aware of uses a tree to celebrate any holiday other than Christmas. For those who use the phrase to recognize other holidays, why not do so explicitly? "Happy Holidays" merely waters down the reason why most Westerners celebrate during the end of December while doing other beliefs the disservice of lumping them together into one non-specific (but Christmas-dominated) "Holiday". By the way, you have from now until December 28th to wish your Jewish friends a Happy Hanukkah.

I apologize to all my well-meaning friends who tend to use "Happy Holidays". Please don't construe this as an attack on you as I know you're simply employing the phraseology that has become the norm in America. However, a lot of us don't see the proliferation of "Happy Holidays" as an inclusive practice, but as one that has been deliberately and successfully pushed by certain culturally and politically influential entities to be exclusive of Christianity or any of its outward trappings. It represents one of the earliest and most subtle attempts of the militantly secular (and often explicitly anti-Christian) to strip Christmas of its meaning and origin. Note that no other widely celebrated holiday is considered so unacceptable by the purveyors of political correctness that it is being stripped of its name in a manner that would make Orwell's Ministry of Truth proud.

All other holidays that are widely celebrated in America are either secular (e.g., Independence Day) or have had most of their religious significance removed (e.g., Easter). Easter, which officially celebrates the resurrection of Christ, is the perfect example of extreme secularization of a nominally religious holiday. Even among many Christians the holiday has become identified more with anthropomorphized rabbits and chocolate eggs than it has with the empty tomb. (You know the forces of secularization have done their jobs well when even the believers can be distracted from the true meaning of their holiday.) However, with Christmas it's almost impossible to remove all traces of Christianity from it. Everybody, believer and nonbeliever, knows what the holiday that has "Christ" in its name is about.

Having gotten their foot in the door by making Christmas the "Holiday that Shall Not Be Named" and by convincing even the believers to use the new politically correct holiday greeting because it's "inclusive", these same entities are becoming even more overt in places like Santa Monica, California:

Across the fruitcaked plain in California, the city of Santa Monica allocated permits for "holiday" displays at Palisades Park by means of lottery. Eighteen of the 21 slots went to atheists — for example, the slogan "37 million Americans know a myth when they see one" over portraits of Jesus, Santa, and Satan.

The real-life Grinches not being content to simply remove all hints of Christianity from Non-Specific December Holiday, they have been working to eliminate even highly secularized symbols of Christmas. Although Santa Claus' origin in the Christian saint, St. Nicholas, has been effectively buried, there have been various attempts throughout the United States to actually ban the mere presence of Santa [a couple examples here and here]. Raise your hand if this brings to mind the Rankin-Bass Santa Claus Is Comin' to Town TV special. There have even been cases in which Christmas trees have been removed. It's becoming more and more difficult for people to claim that there isn't a War on Christmas in the United States.

Often I find myself missing the Christmas spirit I felt while I was an LDS missionary in Veracruz, Mexico. In Veracruz the meaning of the holiday was openly celebrated and over-the-top commercialism hadn't tried to ruin it.

Anyway, now that I've finished my annual War on Christmas diatribe, the Atomic Spud would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas. And because the Atomic Spud is genuinely inclusive, I'd also like to wish a Happy Hanukkah to any Jewish readers (especially to my high school buddy Joe in San Diego).

On a related note, kudos to the Britain-based Games Workshop Web Team for explicitly wishing all us Warhammer and/or Warhammer 40,000 fanatics a Merry Christmas. From what I've heard, you are more likely to be wished a Merry (or Happy) Christmas in the much more secular Britain than you are in the more religious United States.

More Blog Neglect

2011-12-18T20:00:00.001-07:00

I had the feeling that posting on The Atomic Spud would be light when I moved all Warhammer 40,000 material to a dedicated 40K blog. I expect to be putting up some reviews soon (I just finished The Zombie Survival Guide). In the meantime, check out The Atomic Spud's Warhammer 40K Blog.

Competence

2011-12-02T09:58:00.000-07:00

Earlier this year my boss praised me for accomplishing something that I consider to be one of my most basic tasks. Although it was an important and time-sensitive job, it had required less than 10 minutes to do. I looked at him oddly and asked why I deserved such a compliment. That actually flustered him slightly and he responded that not everyone would agree that completing such tasks correctly, on-time, and on a regular basis is easy.

That got me thinking about how often I've been overjoyed when others met my expectations. This definitely isn't limited to the workplace. For example, all I want at a restaurant is a waiter or waitress who keeps my water glass full, stops by a couple times to see if I need anything, and is reasonably civil; i.e., that they do their job. I've talked to many others who will recommend a business or the services of an individual, not because they go above and beyond, but because they simply do what is expected.

I've since coined a phrase that is becoming popular at work:

Mere competence is the new excellence.

How often have you praised a person or an organization for doing exactly what they said they would? Are you increasingly impressed by any book that has a minimum of spelling and grammatical errors? How much of a modern schoolchild's grade is based on the fact that they did an assignment rather than that they did it well? How many college credits have been "earned" effectively because students showed up and breathed the air?

Although this trend depresses me, I guess there is a bright side; it makes the accomplishments of those who strive to do a little better than average look a lot more impressive.

Like Father, Like Son

2011-11-26T07:59:00.001-07:00

My wife has been bugging me to post about Son of Atomic Spud since I haven't mentioned him much since he was born.

I love this ornament

After having three girls, it's a lot of fun to have a boy, especially now when things like superheroes and Star Wars are so popular. Since he's spent most of his life with a stuffed Yoda in his crib, "Yoda" was one of his first words. In fact, since he loves the character so much, Mom bought him this year's talking Yoda Hallmark Christmas ornament rather than a superhero ornament (we had decided that superheroes would be his theme last year).

Both my wife and I agree that it's more fun to dress up our boy than it ever was to dress up the girls. What I call the "geek-Renaissance" has made a lot of fun stuff available, as you can see here:

He's an engineering red shirt; the security red
shirts don't last long in Star Trek

I'm more of a Marvel fan than a DC fan,
but Superman's not too bad

As much as I like my shirt, I'm jealous of his

Even More Daddy-Daughter Bonding Time

2011-11-25T22:53:00.001-07:00

Tonight, my second oldest daughter actually asked me if we could watch a '50s movie together. I had already showed them The Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954), its sequels, and the giant radioactive ant movie Them! (1954) and couldn't think of any '50s movies I had on hand that they might enjoy (I had forgotten that I also own The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (1953)), so I recommended a '30s movie and put on King Kong (1933).

My daughters really enjoyed the movie, especially because they weren't expecting to see dinosaurs in addition to a giant ape. Despite having watched all three Jurassic Park films repeatedly, the girls are just as entertained by Willis O'Brien's stop-motion monsters as they are by Stan Winston's animatronic and computer-generated creatures. Of course, the funniest thing to me is that their favorite scenes seemed to be those that focus on the romance between first mate Jack Driscoll (Bruce Cabot) and Ann Darrow (Fay Wray) as well as those that feature King Kong fighting prehistoric reptiles. I guess I'm lucky that my girls like the giant monster violence in addition to the sappy stuff.

The Atomic Spud's 40K Blog

2011-11-24T23:02:00.001-07:00

I have maintained this blog, The Atomic Spud, since November 2008. Until recently I've used it primarily as a place for movie and book reviews, political commentary, and other (hopefully) amusing anecdotes from my life. Unfortunately, the blog was being overrun by Warhammer 40,0000, which appeals to a smaller audience than the other material. For that reason, I've started The Atomic Spud's Warhammer 40K Blog; a more appropriate place for Warhammer-themed posts. All the 40K-related posts that previously appeared on this blog have been reproduced there with some slight editing.

It's Just a Game

2011-11-20T13:06:00.001-07:00

Usually my wife takes our second daughter to her basketball games while I stay home with the other kids. Well, this time my daughter asked me to take her. She's not quite discovered how much I hate sports, but the games only last about 45 minutes, and I have to be able to say that I went to at least one game, so I agreed to take her. My mind tends to entertain itself in even the most boring of circumstances, so I figured that the worst that could happen would be that I'd get about 45 minutes to ponder issues of deep importance (i.e., what the next addition to my Warhammer 40K army should be).

Hmmm, Predator or Close Combat Terminators?

As can be expected for a league of 1st and 2nd graders that are just learning to play, no score is kept and the refereeing is somewhat loose. Although I'm not a sports fan, I wish they would keep score if only to teach kids that it's fun to win and not the end of the world if you lose. However, the kids are enthusiastic about it and the coaches encourage the kids to work to develop their skills. I couldn't help but to notice that the least talented among the 6 year olds can still dribble and shoot a basketball better than I ever could.

The vast majority of parents at the game were politely supportive of their kids. Since I'm psychologically incapable of cheering loudly or unironically (the best I can muster is a heartfelt "huzzah" under certain circumstances), I would smile at my daughter whenever she'd look my way. Fortunately, she understands that this is how Dad gives his support. Of course, as is bound to happen, there was one particularly loud and less than supportive parent there that didn't realize that a) it was just a friendly game in a kids league and b) that she was sitting within two feet of a person who is extremely sensitive to loud noise. Thanks to her I spent a lot of the game enjoying some nervous tics I developed a few years ago.

This woman was the perfect example of the rabid sports fan, which shouldn't be confused with the enthusiastic sports fan (e.g., my own parents). The existence of the rabid sports fan is one of the myriad reasons why I dislike sports. These are people who can't distinguish between what should be an enjoyable pastime and a matter of vital, life-threatening importance. In fact, the woman (I shall refer to her as "Rabid Mom") is the worst kind of rabid fan; the one who inflicts her flawed priorities on her child and ruins any possibility that he may actually enjoy himself. The outcome of the (unscored) game is unlikely to have any long-term effect on the course of his life, but his mother's attitude may very well destroy any love he has for playing sports or, even worse, may turn him into a rabid fan as well.

"Surely my continuous screaming will
improve my son's basketball performance"

Rabid Mom felt it necessary to spend most of the game yelling at her son, Mason, to "shoot it, shoot it, SHOOT IT!", "pass the ball!", and "get under the net!". Apparently she thought that yelling the most obvious of instructions (e.g., "Get the ball!") in an irate tone would make her son a better basketball player. On several occasions, Mason failed to pass or shoot fast enough and would run out the shot clock (yes, I didn't know what this rule was called and had to look it up). Of course this led to more yelling from Rabid Mom followed by mutterings of "D*** it, what's wrong with him? Why is he such a ball hog?". I would speculate that he thinks that he has to be the star of the team to gain mom's approval. I wonder where he could have gotten such an idea?

Unfortunately, my wife confirms that Rabid Mom isn't alone and that many of the games have seen other parents behave similarly. I have to admit that I am utterly perplexed that there are so many people who believe that this is appropriate behavior at a children's basketball game. The worst part is that they seem to be completely unselfconscious about it. Are they honestly so obsessed about the game that they fail to notice that nobody else is yelling at their son or daughter and that they're ruining the fun for everybody else?

New Warhammer 40K Model

2011-11-13T18:46:00.001-07:00

Again I've neglected my blog in favor of Warhammer 40K. I finished my first figures, a squad of Tactical Marines, earlier this summer. I followed those up with a Terminator Squad and a Dreadnought walker. Now I've finally finished my first tank, of which I'm rather proud. The tank, a "Vindicator" model, carries a Demolisher cannon; the most powerful gun that the Space Marines can field. Since the dark future of 40K portrays mankind as having somehow reverted to a medieval culture that uses elements of the Latin language, I've named my Vindicator Vastator, which is Latin for "Destroyer". Yes, naming a tank "Destroyer" in Latin is the extent of my creativity.

Vastator actually participated in its first game last Saturday. It was mostly complete, although the winch holding the ridiculously large shell wasn't attached, several details weren't yet painted, and it was missing the final washes (the very thin coats that give the model its dirty look). It got off a single shot in the first turn, was stunned and unable to fire in the second, and was destroyed in the third. However, that single shot tore the heart out of B.'s command squad. The points value of the figures killed by one shot exceeded the points value of my tank and the loss of his command squad hampered the effectiveness of his army for the rest of the game. Once that happened, anything else Vastator could have done would have been icing on the cake.

Now that I've finished the Vindicator, I intend to move on to a squad of Sniper Scouts. And I expect to make another relatively pricey order at TheWarStore later this month to add a Predator tank to my collection as well as a few other squads of infantry.

Immaturity and Politics

2011-10-22T07:23:00.000-06:00

It seems like almost all the recent political discussions I've taken part in online have decayed almost immediately into juvenile behavior and incoherent ranting. Until this morning I had posted every comment made on this blog, even those that disagreed with me. However, this morning I found that some brave individual calling himself "Anonymous" had decided that the proper response to this statement from my last post:

Liberals haven't changed for decades. They often call themselves "Progressives", but they simply repackage the same tired ideas from one year to the next while resorting to name-calling when they come up against someone who opposes their philosophies (e.g., "fascists", "racists", "deniers").

was the following tidbit of wisdom:

I would stop at just "fascist". Maybe I would call you a <%$#@> as well. Have a nice life.

I didn't post the comment directly since I will not tolerate obscenity on my blog. However, thank you Mr. or Ms. Anonymous for proving my point.

Name-calling does not constitute an argument and does more harm to one's position than good. It implies that your beliefs are so indefensible that only someone with the maturity level of a 10 year old could hold them (a foul-mouthed 10 year old if you're "Anonymous"). My dear Anonymous, in what way would you say my compatriots and I are fascists? Can you defend or support that statement? Can you refute my claim that Liberals resort to name-calling when they can't provide a cogent argument? Never mind that last item; you actually supported my statement by giving a concrete example.

"That mean old Atomic Spud challenged mybeliefs
and hurt my feelings. He's a poo-poo head!"

Oh, and the "have a nice life" is the icing on the cake. It's impossible not to imagine this being said by a petulant, pouting teenager trying to get in the last word before slamming her bedroom door.

A Few Thoughts On Politics

2011-10-15T15:49:00.000-06:00

There was a time, B40K, when I actually commented frequently on politics. However, I realized that Warhammer 40,000 is simply more interesting because of the variety of characters and figures, the imagination involved in the game's sci-fi background, and the variation from one game to the next. Politics, on the other hand, are extraordinarily predictable. Liberals haven't changed for decades. They often call themselves "Progressives", but they simply repackage the same tired ideas from one year to the next while resorting to name-calling when they come up against someone who opposes their philosophies (e.g., "fascists", "racists", "deniers"). The Left clearly fits Einstein's definition of insanity by doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. How many times has the President pushed additional stimulus bills even after the first failed so spectacularly? Heck, how many Liberal ideas have been tried since Woodrow Wilson's and Franklin Roosevelt's presidencies and been shown to be utterly ineffective? Obama's Keynesian approach to the economy might as well be called New Deal 2.

Although it's often forgotten, both Wilson and Roosevelt used crises (i.e., World War I and the Great Depression, respectively) as an excuse to exercise an unprecedented amount of power over the economy (Liberal Fascism provides an excellent overview of the policies of these two presidents). Apparently some Liberals are tired of waiting for another major war or genuine depression to repeat this; there are a number of them who have decided that democracy is in the way and have publicly stated that Obama should declare marshal law or a state of emergency and pass his policies in dictatorial fashion. Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr. is the latest to do so. If a Republican or a Conservative had said that a Right-leaning president should do such a thing (especially if that Conservative were an elected representative), the mainstream media would be trumpeting it from the rooftops. However, I often get the impression that the far Left doesn't actually have a problem with dictatorship as long as that dictatorship implements their policies (look at how the Left fawns over Castro or Che). If Jackson's thinking weren't representative of the Left's actual way of thinking, I would have expected some sort of condemnation of his statement by now.

And then there's the Republican Party, which seems bound and determined to destroy itself. Obama's mishandling of... well, just about everything, should be a gift from the heavens for the GOP. But I expect the Party to completely squander the opportunity, as it often does. I'm still wary of my own party ever since it spent money like a drunken sailor (i.e., became Democrats-light) in the early 2000s. And I'm baffled by many of the candidates/potential candidates that the GOP has put forward over the past few election cycles. Haven't we figured out by now that professional politicians won't govern by the Conservative principles that we claim to cherish? The best politicians are few and far between because they are often those who accept the position reluctantly (e.g., George Washington). It's been said that a true Conservative politician would have to be drafted and dragged from his or her home to serve in Congress. Right now it seems like the person who is closest to the Conservative ideal is Herman Cain. Unfortunately it seems like many have decided that he's unelectable because... um... because it's been decided that he's unelectable, I guess. Supposedly the problem with Cain is that he's never held public office before. Honestly, that's not a bug, it's a feature. I've liked Cain since the earliest GOP debates and am encouraged by the recent polls showing him to be a frontrunner. Either way, I know who I'll be voting for come primary time.

Another Warhammer 40K Death Match

2011-09-25T02:12:00.001-06:00

B. very selfishly ran off to Hawaii with his wife last weekend, so this past Saturday marked two weeks without playing a game of 40K. However, last night we were finally able to get together for yet another round of our favorite unhealthy obsession. Saturday night's game of 40K was notable for a few reasons. First, it was our first game played at my home rather than at B.'s. Second, it was my first game played entirely with my own figures rather than with a mix of my models supplemented by some of B.'s. Finally, I showed that an army of standard Space Marines can take on the elite Grey Knights and make it an extremely close fight.

This time around I took the "Sir Robin" approach to the battle; i.e., I bravely ran away while shooting everything I had. Since the Grey Knights are geared towards close combat rather than a shooting fight, this approach significantly leveled the playing field. I lost by a small margin, but the game could have ended very differently if a single dice roll had resulted in a three instead of a two. My Dreadnought simply needed to score one more hit against B.'s Dreadknight, after which it could have turned its heavy weapon against his remaining two Knights. Unfortunately, I had burned up a lot of my luck earlier in the game, the shot missed, and the Dreadnought was forced into close combat with the Dreadknight. The two Dreads duked it out and annihilated each other. Considering that his model was worth a lot more points than mine, I wasn't too sad about the outcome of that particular fight.

Dreadnought vs. Dreadknight: Grudge match of the week

Movie Review: The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the Eighth Dimension (1984)

2011-09-18T16:39:00.000-06:00

Although Netflix sent me this DVD back in June, I didn't get to it until now (once again, I blame Warhammer 40,000). Buckaroo Banzai has been a sci-fi cult classic since it was released in 1984. In fact, quite a few of those who created Star Trek: The Next Generation were fans of the movie and inserted various in-jokes into computer screens, starship dedication plaques, etc. I had thus thought that I would like the movie as much as I have so many other cult sci-fi movies. As it turned out, Buckaroo Banzai left almost no impression on me.

Buckaroo Banzai is a brain surgeon, particle physicist, and rock star. He is recognized the world over and has regular phone conversations with the U.S. president. His band also doubles as his lab assistants and, when necessary, his heavily armed strike team. This makes for a wacky premise that is so underplayed that it loses much of its humor. Sure he's supposed to be a brain surgeon, but we only see him perform a single surgery at the beginning of the movie and then his medical expertise is never really used again. He's supposed to be a rock star, but he performs only once in a New Jersey club. Most of the time he plays the part of a particle physicist that helps to perfect and test a method for traveling through solid matter by entering the "eighth dimension" (he only does this once in the first 15 minutes of the movie).

The plot primarily revolves around the efforts of a renegade faction of alien beings from "Planet 10" to steal the "oscillation overthruster"; the device that allows one to enter the eighth dimension. Apparently these aliens arrived on Earth years before by way of the eighth dimension and want to use the device to return to their homeworld to finish their rebellion. In the meantime, the aliens have established a company called "Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems" that has received a number of defense contracts. When Banzai's trip through a solid mountain via the eighth dimension becomes famous, another group of aliens realizes that the renegade leader might be able to return to Planet 10. They arrive in orbit and threaten to destroy the Earth in order to kill the renegade leader if Banzai can't capture him first.

Overall, the movie wasn't bad, but it wasn't that remarkable, either. I was never bored (the unpardonable movie sin), but it seemed like the movie squandered most of its potential. It wasn't funny enough to be a real comedy and the wackier elements of the story weren't played up enough to be effective. At the same time there was too much comedy for it to be taken as a more serious sci-fi film. John Lithgow, who plays a human scientist who was possessed by the aliens' leader during an early attempt to travel through the eight dimension, gets the most chuckles. But this is through Lithgow's over-the-top Italian accent and Mussolini impersonation, which get old fast.

Then there are the stray plot threads that come out of nowhere and go nowhere and cause the plot to lose its focus. The most egregious of these is the revelation that Buckaroo Banzai's love interest is the long lost twin of his (deceased?, estranged?) first wife. Maybe these plot threads would have made more sense if the sequel that's mentioned at the end of the film had been made. Normally I would mourn an unmade sequel (e.g., The Rocketeer deserved a sequel, but its disappointing box office receipts killed it), but the thought of the promised Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime League just isn't that exciting.
C+

My Poor, Neglected Blog

2011-09-05T12:26:00.000-06:00

A few months ago my blog was averaging over 100 visits a day, thanks to Google. Well, I guess that Google's search algorithm is affected by how often you update your blog; I've since dropped to about 60 hits a day. I can only blame this on one thing: Warhammer 40,000.

Until B. introduced me to that infernal game (that wonderful, awesome game) I was on the Internet all the time. I actually knew what was happening in the world, I followed politics, I read b-movie reviews, and I updated my blog frequently. Now I don't even know what Republicans are running for president (not that it matters, I'd vote for him or her over Obama anyday), the list of B-Masters reviews that I need to catch up on has grown significantly, and my blog was updated only once last month (and then it was a 40K post). Netflix was the best entertainment-related thing ever during the B40K era ("Before Warhammer 40,000"). Now I've had a couple DVDs for nearly three months and I've still not watched them.

How can I not add this guy to my collection?

It's not like I'm playing the game all the time. In fact, we only play it once a week. However, since I'm actively building my army, I end up painting figures almost every night. This process takes a lot of time since I have an obsessive, perfectionist personality. I had told my wife that once my Space Marine army was built, I would have more time in the evenings. Unfortunately, 40K is addictive and B. and I have been talking about expanding the number of armies we have to add some variety to our games. Specifically, I've considered getting a Chaos Daemon army to complement B.'s Grey Knights (the Grey Knights are Space Marines who specialize in daemon-hunting).

So, I hope to get back into blogging by posting a few book and movie reviews, maybe a couple CD (i.e., mp3 album) reviews, and some political commentary... Oh, who am I kidding? This will probably be my only post for the month and I'll spend the rest of September building all of this stuff:

This is about $200 dollars worth of 40K stuff

Another Warhammer 40K Post Mortem

2011-08-20T01:33:00.000-06:00

mon·o·ma·ni·a /mänəˈmānēə/Noun: Exaggerated enthusiasm for or preoccupation with one thing.

I just got back from yet another 40K game with B. Despite the fact that I lost again (it's hard to beat someone who's been playing it since he was 12), we both agreed that it was one of our best games. For me this was due, in part, to the fact that I fully chose my army without assistance from B. As usual I played my Space Marines while B. played the Xenomorph-like Tyranids. We both started with about 1200 points and he won the game with about 300 or 400 points left. My tactical errors were few (I kept using heavy troops to fire fragmentation missiles against hordes of low-point creatures rather than firing high strength krak missiles against individual high-point monsters). In the end, the game was close enough that it was determined as much by lucky/unlucky dice rolls as by skill.

The results of the most recent game were in sharp contrast to my last two games, in which I felt like my performance was very poor. Unfortunately I've proven to be a very defensive player but I've chosen a 40K army that tends to work better when used aggressively. At B.'s suggestion I've been gearing my own army towards a slightly more defensive stance than the army that I've been borrowing from him while also playing more aggressively. Thus, I've started using a Devastator squad with long range missile launchers to harass his army while simultaneously attacking at close range with troops equipped for close assaults.

Speaking of my army, it's grown substantially in recent weeks, which meant that I only had to borrow a few models to play a 1200 point game. Most recently I completed a Space Marine captain; my most elaborate figure and the one who proved to be tonight's MVP when he stood toe-to-toe with two hive tyrants (cumulatively worth three to four times as many points as the captain) and killed one of them before being messily devoured.

Soon my army will be positively monstrous. I expect to complete a five man terminator squad before next week's game and a Dreadnought before the following game. But that's just the tip of the iceberg: over the past month I've accumulated quite a sum of money from a portion of an award I received at work, a little bit of money I earned working overtime, and my usual monthly allowance. This past week my wife placed a fairly large order for me that will more than triple the point value of my army. Although I won't admit how much I spent on 40K models this week alone, an incredulous coworker commented that I could have bought a high-end video game system for that much money (I can honestly say that I've had more fun building models and playing 40K than I've ever had playing a video game). My coworker was even more amazed when I told him that I had spent several times that amount over the five years that I was collecting Star Wars Legos. And since new 40K models are released every few years rather than every few months, as Legos are, this week's purchase will form the bulk of my army. I have plans to build a few more squads, but nothing like the bulk purchase I just made.

"The Shifting Definition of Tolerance"

2011-07-30T15:37:00.002-06:00

The nuclear family under attack

I was recently reading an essay adapted from an address given by Bruce D. Porter at Brigham Young University. The subject was on defending the traditional family, which has often caused controversy for Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As pointed out by Porter, the Church and its members are often accused of intolerance when they advocate the traditional definition of the family. In the excerpt below, Porter discusses how the definition of tolerance has shifted in recent decades:

Until recently in our national history, tolerance referred to racial and religious non-discrimination. It meant civility in the political arena; in other words, respecting the right of others to express their views, even if we do not agree with them. It meant treating all people with decency and respect. Such tolerance is an important and vital part of our American heritage.

Today, however, the world is in danger of abandoning all sense of absolute right or wrong, all morality and virtue, replacing them with an all-encompassing “tolerance” that no longer means what it once meant. An extreme definition of tolerance is now widespread that implicitly or explicitly endorses the right of every person to choose their own morality, even their own “truth,” as though morality and truth were mere matters of personal preference. This extreme tolerance culminates in a refusal to recognize any fixed standards or draw moral distinctions of any kind. Few dare say no to the “almighty self” or suggest that some so-called “lifestyles” may be destructive, contrary to higher law, or simply wrong.

When tolerance is so inflated out of all proportions, it means the death of virtue, for the essence of morality is to draw clear distinctions between right and wrong. All virtue requires saying no firmly and courageously to all that is morally bankrupt.

Curiously enough, this new modern tolerance is often a one-way street. Those who practice it expect everyone to tolerate them in anything they say or do, but show no tolerance themselves toward those who express differing viewpoints or defend traditional morality. Indeed, their intolerance is often most barbed toward those of religious conviction. But let there be no misunderstanding or deception: the First Amendment right of free speech applies to religious speech as well as to other kinds of speech. Believers of all faiths have every right to participate in and share their convictions in the public arena.

I agree wholeheartedly with Porter's statement.

The last paragraph of the excerpt reminds me of the experience of Californian Mormons a few years ago. In 2008 I mentioned that Mormons in California were facing a lot of resistance based on the Church's support of Proposition 8 [here and here]. Gay marriage supporters were even going as far as using California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) to attack the Church. Apparently they like the idea of 'free speech for me, but not for thee'. From what I've heard from my parents, who live in Southern California, although Proposition 8 may have been passed three years ago and been overturned by a Federal District Court last year (although the ruling has been stayed), Church members in California are still being harassed.

Book Reviews

2011-07-25T22:15:00.001-06:00

[These reviews originally appeared on www.goodreads.com]

The World's Worst Weapons: From Exploding Guns to Malfunctioning Missiles by Martin J. Dougherty
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Exactly as the title says, this book is about the world's worst weapons. Each weapon gets its own two page spread with photos and/or drawings, a description of what made the weapon bad, information on its country of origin, and the year(s) in which it was developed or used. Several of the weapons are definitely worse than others, with some actually rising to the level of simple mediocrity. But the bad ones are truly bad (how could anyone have thought that a tank with only a few inches of ground clearance could possibly be adequate?). A wide variety of weapons are covered, ranging from ancient and medieval melee weapons to the Davy Crockett atomic recoilless gun with its suicidally short range.

Although a lot of good information is presented, the book has several typos and formatting errors. Each weapon has a data box which lists several categories such as date of use, weight, etc. On several pages the category header doesn't line up with the relevant data (e.g., the header says "weight" but instead gives you the weapon's range). A few times the flag used to show the nation of origin doesn't match the nation of origin as written in the text.

As an inexpensive book meant to provide entertainment for military history buffs, The World's Worst Weapons is a worthwhile read. It's unfortunate that an embarrassing number of obvious errors distract from the book's overall value.

View all my reviews

Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America by Ann Coulter
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

It's good be be a victim in America, argues Ann Coulter. Using a variety of media sources, polls, etc., Coulter shows that liberals have carefully created special classes that they claim to be victims of whites, capitalism, the wealthy, males, or any other politically unpopular class, race, philosophy, etc. (Coulter emphasizes that what she is talking about is above and beyond the real racism or prejudice that rational people acknowledge has actually happened.) However, in the process of trying to right the "wrongs" that these classes have supposedly suffered, liberals actually create real victims by extorting apologies, money, status, or favors out of less favored groups.

The best description of Guilty is that it's an Ann Coulter book. Coulter is excellent at preaching to the choir. If you already agree with her, as I often do, you will find her remarks funny, witty, and spot-on. Those who don't agree with her will find the book grating and her humor irritating and insulting. Coulter's style is simply too confrontational to actually convert anyone to her point of view.

I liked Guilty quite a bit, but I didn't find it as eye-opening as her earlier Treason. The evidence Coulter uses to prove her thesis will be familiar to anyone who pays attention to American politics; there's not a whole lot of new information here. The end of the book also seems to come abruptly, as if Coulter simply ran out of things to say and didn't feel like providing a satisfactory summary or conclusion. However, Coulter's wit makes Guilty an entertaining and worthwhile read.

View all my reviews

Miscellanea, Part II

2011-07-21T06:25:00.001-06:00

Warhammer 40K
B. and I played two scenarios last weekend between his Grey Knights and my Space Marines. In the first I attempted to defend one quarter of the board while he set up on the opposite corner. I was allowed 30% more troops while he was allowed to set up after I did while also making the first move (usually the one who sets up first is the one who goes first). I made the mistake of setting up too close to his position, which allowed his Knights to charge directly into my forces. The Grey Knights are good in a shooting fight but are excellent in close combat. Since my forces outnumbered his Grey Knights, I had the advantage of having significantly more guns on the board. Unfortunately, I couldn't benefit from this because he was able to charge into close combat almost immediately.

In the second scenario we played a quick 400 point game B. called a "soul grinder". This time I was smarter and used my scouts to their fullest extent while taking advantage of the number of guns I had. This game turned out a lot different.

Dear Neighbor...
Late last Sunday night you apparently liked your music so much that you thought that the entire neighborhood should hear it. And I do mean the entire neighborhood; from the short walk I took to try to find your house I realized that you must live at least a block or two away. Please remember that a) a lot of your neighbors have to get up before 5 AM to catch the bus for work and b) nobody wants to hear your music no matter what time of day it is. When I finally get my telekinetic powers I intend to use them to explode your speakers... and your head.

On Debt Reduction
So President Obama seems to be willing to reduce the deficit only if he can raise taxes. Why is it that he's only willing to talk about debt reduction if he is also allowed to raise taxes? I can only guess that he intends to use the increased revenue to justify even greater spending down the road. Well, the theoretically increased revenue; raising taxes often damages the economy and can be absolutely devastating during a recession. Is Obama even capable of making a decision that isn't utterly inept?

This Day In History: The Apollo 11 Moon Landing

2011-07-20T18:43:00.000-06:00

On this day in 1969 Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin landed on the surface of the moon in the Lunar Module Eagle. Mission pilot Michael Collins remained in lunar orbit in the Command Module Columbia.

Armstrong and Aldrin spent 21 hours and 31 minutes on the lunar surface before returning to Columbia. Although Collins' contribution is overshadowed by that of his compatriots, he played a vital role in the success of the mission. Later astronauts would spend over three days on the surface.

I don't think mankind has done anything quite as cool since then.

My Parents Laughed at Me

2011-07-04T09:30:00.000-06:00

Saturday night we made a video call to my parents. As usual they asked how things were going with each of us. When they asked how I was doing, I showed off my recently completed 40K squad. I guess I was a little too enthusiastic about them because it didn't take long for my mother to start laughing. She said that it was the cutest I'd been since I was 12.

My parents are great people (saintly, actually, since they tolerated me for 18+ years). Unfortunately, they're also fairly normal. You know the kind: they watch sports, they read popular novels, they watch a wide variety of movies, my dad likes to work in the yard, they enjoy going to the beach, etc. My mother's only deviation is that she likes to watch Mystery Science Theater 3000 with me. Although my general personality and physical features indicate that I wasn't switched at birth, my parents still can't figure out where I came from.

My squad understands me

My parents know me pretty well, and they know I have a tendency to obsess about things. Of course my wife has been telling them about my latest hobby/unhealthy fixation, so my parents couldn't help but to tease me about it. They asked me how I liked the game, how it's played, how I do against my friend, etc. And every time I said that I needed to add an assault squad, or a tank, or any other model to my army they would emphasize the word "need". "Oh, so you need a tactical squad," or "you need a Land Raider," they would say.

I know that Fate will play a cruel joke on me and make my children normal too. Then both my parents and my kids will look at me with a mix of amusement and perplexity.

First Warhammer 40K Figures

2011-07-02T02:30:00.002-06:00

Obviously I've been neglecting my blogging recently. Under other circumstances I would have blogged extensively since my wife and kids met with my parents in St. George a few weeks ago while I had a b-movie and Mythbusters marathon at home. And the seven hours of Warhammer 40,000 that I played with my friend (6:30 PM to 1:30 AM) while the wife and kids were on vacation would normally have merited at least a few words (as it happened, B. absolutely killed me in the first game; I won the second game by a small margin). However, I've simply not been online a whole lot ever since I started working on my 40K army in earnest.

Up until recently all my hobbies were computer related (e.g., blogging). However, as I've mentioned before, I've recently gotten into 40K and have been playing it almost weekly. Until now I've been playing with B.'s space marine figures while intending to build up my own army. For someone whose longest-lasting hobby was building model airplanes and the occasional ship, much of the appeal of 40K is the fact that you build and paint your own playing pieces. Most of these pieces are about an inch tall, although monsters like the Tyranid Hive Tyrant can be several inches tall. The models are highly customizable and the game's "fluff" (i.e., the extra background story that helps to make the game so much fun) says that the space marines' power armor is highly customized and personalized such that no suit of armor is identical to another. Thus, a squad of ten marines will have ten figures that are all somewhat unique, making them particularly fun to build.

Last Sunday, after weeks of preparation and practice, I finished my first space marine figure. This particular figure was part of a five man squad that came in a 40K beginner's paint set. While it's not nearly as impressive as the professionally painted figures in Games Workshop's catalogs, I'm still fairly proud of it. I was bound and determined to have the rest of the squad finished in time for Friday night's game so I had a marathon painting session from 6:30 PM Thursday evening to 2:00 AM Friday morning with an additional few hours of work before lunchtime. That night I faced my friend's Tyranid army in a four hour slog (our longest game yet). Of course my new squad was wiped out during the game, which I lost. However, it was one of our best yet and I managed to kill all but about 200 points of his 1250 point army. The fact that my newly finished figures were wiped out in their first game reminds me of this comic.

The first of five

My poor marine was dismembered by a Tyranid Hormagaunt

I keep all my painting materials in a single box that I can put out of reach of little hands. This box has since come to be known as the "Warhammer Happy Fun Box".

The Warhammer Happy Fun Box

Government and "High-Speed" Rail

2011-06-19T12:40:00.000-06:00

In my last post, I mentioned that politicians keep spending vast quantities of money on things they don't understand. Commuter trains are yet another costly thing that politicians don't understand. It seems that one of their most recent obsessions is with "high-speed" rail projects. Even President Obama has been pushing these pork-barrel projects in the past couple years.

A few years ago the voters in a number of states were duped into approving the installation of high-speed rail systems between certain major cities. However, as costs spiral out of control in a bad economy, it is slowly coming to light that many of the assumptions made to justify the projects were unrealistic. The trains are likely to carry fewer passengers than was predicted for a lot more than was expected. For example, California's proposed new rail system has approximately doubled in price while the early ridership estimates used to determine whether or not the train could operate without additional subsidies are new believed to be too high.

According to this article, Iowa has a similar problem:

The Federal government is again offering money it does not have to entice a state (Iowa) to spend money that it does not have on something it does not need. The state of Iowa is being asked to provide funds to match federal funding for a so-called "high speed rail" line from Chicago to Iowa City. The new rail line would simply duplicate service that is already available. Luxury intercity bus service is provided between Iowa City and Chicago twice daily. The luxury buses are equipped with plugs for laptop computers and with free wireless high-speed internet service. Perhaps most surprisingly, the luxury buses make the trip faster than the so-called high speed rail line, at 3:50 hours. The trains would take more than an hour longer (5:00 hours). No one would be able to get to Chicago quicker than now. Only in America does anyone call a train that averages 45 miles per hour "high speed rail."

It gets even better:

The state would be required to provide $20 million in subsidies to buy trains and then more to operate the trains, making up the substantial difference between costs and passenger fares. This is despite a fare much higher than the bus fare, likely to be at least $50 (based upon current fares for similar distances). By contrast, the luxury bus service charges a fare of $18.00, and does not require a penny of taxpayer subsidy.

I have a coworker who insists that Keynesian economics works because he believes that government planners can more efficiently manage the economy than the free market. To my coworker I would ask: does this all too typical situation affect your faith in government planning at all? If it doesn't, please refrain from voting during the next election.

Electric Cars Not So Green After All

2011-06-16T18:24:00.000-06:00

Electric cars: more total
emissions than standard cars?

I love it when self-righteous environmentalists are made to look like fools. I got my day's worth of schadenfraude from this article on the environmental impact of "green" electric cars:

An electric car owner would have to drive at least 129,000 km [80,157 miles] before producing a net saving in CO2. Many electric cars will not travel that far in their lifetime because they typically have a range of less than 145 km [90 miles] on a single charge and are unsuitable for long trips. Even those driven 160,000 km [99,419 miles] would save only about a tonne [1.1 tons] of CO2 over their lifetimes.

As pretty much any engineer who has even a rudimentary understanding of the kind of batteries used in electric cars could tell you, a lot of energy goes into making those batteries. Thus:

... a mid-size electric car would produce 23.1 tonnes [25.5 tons] of CO2 over its lifetime, compared with 24 tonnes [26.4 tons] for a similar petrol car. Emissions from manufacturing electric cars are at least 50 per cent higher because batteries are made from materials such as lithium, copper and refined silicon, which require much energy to be processed.

Just as it does with nearly every other pie-in-the-sky environmental fad, the US Government is heavily subsiding electric cars such as the Chevy Volt. Politicians claim that they're doing this for environmental reasons, although I'm sure auto industry lobbyists and the United Auto Worker's Union also have a lot to do with it. Either way, this study shows us that our supposed representatives are again spending our money/our children's money on something they don't understand and that doesn't live up to its promises once you actually look into the messy details and unintended consequences.

I'm reminded of then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's 2004 State of the State address that encouraged Californians to switch to hydrogen-fueled cars. Why not, asks the politician, since hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe and it burns cleanly (the end result is water vapor)? Of course, a basic understanding of chemistry would tell you that the reactivity of hydrogen ensures that it's not found in an elemental state on Earth and that it therefore must be separated from whatever other element(s) it's attached to. This process usually requires a significant amount of energy. In addition, hydrogen is difficult to transport or store.

Whether the car is electrical or hydrogen powered, energy must be consumed to either charge the car or to create its fuel. Since about 68% of US electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels (with coal accounting for much of it), these alternative fuel vehicles are likely to actually increase total emissions since more "dirty" electricity would need to be produced to run "clean" cars. And, thanks to the second law of thermodynamics, the more energy conversions you introduce, the more inefficient your total process becomes. There are a number of conversion processes needed to run an electric car, each of them introducing significant inefficiencies; e.g., burning coal to heat steam, using steam to spin a generator, spinning a generator to produce electricity, using electricity to charge a battery, and using a battery to run a car's electric motor. In short, a huge amount of energy has to be produced at the beginning of the process just to provide the relatively small amount of useful energy needed to operate the car.

I think one of the best arguments for limited government is the fact that politicians regularly waste huge sums of money and force burdensome regulations or mandates on us based on insufficient or incorrect information. Should we really give so much power to a small group of elite ignoramuses?

Allergy Testing

2011-06-12T16:21:00.001-06:00

Last week I went to the allergist, having been given a referral by my personal physician. I was there for a wonderful three hours, during which I was poked with needles and given injections to determine what I might be allergic to.

They started with the so-called "scratch test". This is a misnomer since I wasn't scratched; they pricked my back with 85 short needles that aren't long enough to cause bleeding, but are certainly long enough to hurt. Each needle was coated in a different common allergen. About 15 minutes after exposing me to the allergens, the physician's assistant came back to check on the results. Reactions were marked by itchy, swollen blotches and were given a rating from 1+ (mild reaction) to 4+ (very severe reaction) based on the size and appearance of the blotch.

Since people don't always respond to this type of test, I was retested on several allergens that didn't cause a reaction during the first test. This time they injected larger doses of the allergen under the skin of my upper arm with short hypodermic needles. This series of tests involved 26 allergens. It's hard to say whether the first or the second series of tests was more enjoyable.

Of the allergens that I was tested with, I responded to six of them. I had a 1+ reaction to alfalfa (something I'm never around), a 1+ with Utah Juniper (one of the most common trees in the area), and a 1+ with dog dander. I got a 3+ (severe reaction) with tobacco (good thing I don't smoke) as well as with household dust (uh oh). Finally, I had a 4+ reaction to cat dander.

I knew I had problems with cats since being in a room where a cat has been (it doesn't even need to be in the room at the same time) causes such a severe reaction that I need to take an inhaler. I also knew that I had problems with dust, although I didn't know that it would be considered severe. Unfortunately, our home is filled with dust collecting surfaces (e.g., dozens of Star Wars Lego sets, seven overflowing floor-to-ceiling bookcases, various flat surfaces) and the mere act of trying to clean them raises a cloud that leaves me wheezing.

Oddly enough, I don't think I know a single nerd that doesn't have at least a few significant allergies.

More Warhammer 40,000

2011-06-06T13:03:00.001-06:00

The Dreadknight

On Friday night my friend (for brevity I'll simply call him "B.") and I played two games of 40K. For the first game B. fielded his brand new and still unpainted Grey Knights army. The Grey Knights are a specialized (and heavily armed) Space Marine chapter. His enormous "Dreadknight" killed four of my Raven Guard Space Marines in his first turn. A horrendous series of dice rolls utterly doomed my army, although at one point I came very close to killing the Dreadknight with a partially crippled tank. Next weekend I hope to do better against that particular army.

Space Marines vs. Space Marines

Captain Shrike didn't do
much for me this time

In the second game my marines faced off against a Tyranid swarm (a huge army of figures with relatively low point values) with significantly better results. B. did give me some general advice and allowed a do-over when I made a serious tactical error with Captain Shrike (a high value character who didn't end up doing a whole lot anyway), but I think my victory was mostly fair. Although I believe B. is coaching me mostly because he's a nice guy, I also think that he's motivated to train me into being a more challenging opponent. As I mentioned before, he hasn't really had anyone to play against in several years.

Quality Gloves and Psychological Liberation

2011-06-05T11:58:00.000-06:00

AHHHHHHHH!!!

Yesterday I gave our garage a long-overdue Spring cleaning. Although I couldn't stand the mess that it had become, I had been reluctant to clean it because my hands would get dirty. I've long had a problem with getting my hands dirty, which apparently goes back to before I was in kindergarten. I don't have a Howard Hughes-esque fear of germs; it's more of a severe discomfort with having grit, grease, oil, or dust on my hands. And the discomfort isn't just caused by the fact that there's grime on my hands; it's also caused by a fear of making clean surfaces or objects dirty with whatever is on me.

Unlike those with OCD, I don't have the need for ritualistic hand washing. Instead, I have the need for general cleanliness that is characteristic of OCPD (OCPD is very often confused with OCD). For that reason, in addition to when normal people would wash their hands, I wash mine after eating, after handling any sort of food, when I come in the house after having been outdoors (even if I didn't really touch anything), after coming into contact with dirty or gritty surfaces, or whenever I simply feel like my hands need washing (usually once an hour). Unfortunately, the same compulsion that makes me avoid getting dirty also drives me to want to clean and organize things.

Now that's more like it

Well, last year my company put a group of us into a one day NASCAR-themed training program in which we were trained to perform a pit crew's job on a race car (although I don't care for NASCAR, the training was actually entertaining and surprisingly applicable to our company). Of course the idea of even doing that type of work made me very uncomfortable until I found out that they were going to put us in pit crew jumpsuits and give us gloves. The Mechanix Wear brand gloves we used were designed for pit crews, so they protect your hands while still allowing you a good sense of touch. Since they were ours to keep after the training, I took them home and put them in my toolbox. When I finally decided to clean out the garage this weekend, I pulled on the gloves and went to work.

The effect of the gloves was liberating. Despite insect carcasses, dust, dirt, moldy leaves, grass clippings, cobwebs, etc., I was able to do all the cleaning I needed without the usual psychological issues. And, unlike gardening or standard work gloves, the mechanic's gloves gave me plenty of dexterity for sweeping, picking up small rocks, and even for gathering scraps of paper off the floor. At the same time, they protected my hands while I was breaking up boxes with a utility knife. For anyone who is interested in these types of gloves, you can buy them on Amazon.

I often wish it were socially acceptable to wear gloves all the time.

Movie Review: Thor (2011)

2011-05-30T16:16:00.000-06:00

While hunting for meteorological disturbances in the New Mexico desert, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and her research partners accidentally hit a disoriented man with their jeep. An extended flashback narrated by Odin, ruler of the realm of Asgard, explains how his son, Thor, god of thunder (Chris Hemsworth), ended up confused and powerless on Earth. Thor had been enraged by a small scale incursion of Asgard by the Frost Giants, a people with whom the Asgardians had an uneasy truce. In his anger, and contrary to his father's command, Thor took his brother, Loki, and four of his friends to the world of Jotunheim to confront the king of the Frost Giants. Although Thor was holding his own with the power of the magical hammer, Mjolnir, in the end the six Asgardians found themselves outnumbered and had to be rescued by Odin. With war rekindled between Asgard and Jotunheim, Odin declared Thor to be unworthy of kingship and exiled him to Earth. Odin then placed an incantation on Mjolnir, declaring that only one who is worthy will be able to wield the hammer and the power of Thor, and cast the weapon to Earth as well.

Now dependent on the physical strength of a mortal and the kindness of Jane Foster, Thor must learn to overcome his arrogance and to earn the right to wield Mjolnir again. Foster and her friends, who are searching for proof of the existence of wormholes (the path between Asgard and Earth just happens to be one), don't know just what to make of Thor. While the things he says seem crazy, events start to indicate that he's telling the truth. In the meanwhile, Agent Coulson (the SHIELD agent from the two Iron Man movies) and his team set up a research laboratory in the crater where the hammer lies. Not only is the ancient weapon slightly radioactive, but it can't be moved from its resting place by any natural means. Back in Asgard, Odin falls into the periodic "Odinsleep", but is in such a weakened condition this time that he may not wake up from it. Loki, who we discover to be a traitor (what did you expect from the trickster god?), thus takes the throne and plans the death of his exiled brother. Eventually, the friends of the newly humbled Thor head to Earth to warn him just as Loki's plans come to a head.

What's the point of being ruler of Asgard if the
throne doesn't come with a big screen TV?

When the post-credit sequence in Iron Man showed that Marvel Entertainment intended to make an Avengers movie, I knew that Thor was inevitable. My biggest concern was that Iron Man was as realistic as a superhero movie was going to get (the existence of powered armor is a lot easier to believe than any superpower) and that the fantastic and magical elements of a movie based on the The Mighty Thor comic book series would seem completely out of place in the world of the Iron Man franchise. However, the film ties itself closely to Iron Man by involving the appropriately bland Agent Coulson and by including a brief but hilarious exchange between SHIELD agents. When the Destroyer (a magical weapon that looks like a fire-filled suit of armor) appears outside of the New Mexico town where Thor and Foster's team are, we get this from the SHIELD agents:

Agent Cale: "Is that one of Stark's?"
Agent Coulson: "I don't know. That guy never tells me anything."

Additionally, Kenneth Branagh's Thor almost seamlessly blends the fantastic and the real-world elements. The scene shifts from a small town on Earth to the realm of Asgard (which can't even be said to exist on any sort planet) aren't nearly as jarring as I would have expected. The film also goes out of its way to explain Asgard's magic as science that is so advanced that it simply appears to be magic. Arthur C. Clarke and his famous statement on the topic (i.e., "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic") is even explicitly mentioned by Foster's research assistant.

"Is that one of Stark's?"

Thor only has a few weaknesses. First, I never really believed that Jane Foster would so quickly fall in love with Thor. The character is indeed physically fit, and he has a likeable personality when he's not being arrogant, but Foster's character as established earlier in the movie doesn't strike me as one who would be smitten so easily. Second, some of the Asgardian costumes are a little over the top and border on being silly. This was somewhat mitigated by the fact that the movie itself recognizes this. When Thor's friends arrive on Earth, the two SHIELD agents on surveillance duty debate over whether or not they should call it in to base, with one of them asking if there's a renaissance fair in town. When they finally radio it in, the agent says "we've got Xena, Jackie Chan, and Robin Hood here... oh, and some Lord of the Rings looking dude headed your way." This line was particularly funny for me since I had thought that Thor's female friend looked like Xena from the very beginning of the film.

Finally, when in possession of Mjolnir, Thor seems a little too powerful. The action scenes are certainly spectacular; there's something very satisfying about seeing a superhero smash things with a supernatural hammer, and they even managed to make Thor's ability to fly by spinning his hammer not seem ridiculous. But there are no clearly defined limits to his powers (to be fair, this is a problem that's inherent in the comic book itself). By making a superhero nearly omnipotent, a writer is forced to resort to increasingly absurd ways to challenge the character. This happened with Peter Petrelli in the first two seasons of the TV show Heroes. Petrelli had the ability to acquire and retain the superpowers of any nearby "specials". By the end of the second season it became apparent that the writers themselves couldn't remember the growing roster of Petrelli's abilities when they had him struggle to remove a vault door using his psychokinetic powers rather than have him simply walk through it using a power he had acquired earlier in the season.

No, I'm still not buying it

If the writers of The Avengers aren't careful, having Thor team up with Captain American, who's merely an enhanced human, or the armor-wearing Tony Stark will make as much sense as DC Comics' Justice League lineup. What's the point of keeping around heroes with limited superpowers (e.g., Aquaman, whose primary power is communicating with marine life) or no superpowers at all (e.g., Batman) when you have characters like Superman (who can fly, has super strength, has X-ray vision, etc.) or Green Lantern (who can conjure up just about anything he can think of with his power ring)? You'd think that whenever something really dangerous popped up, heroes like Thor or Superman would finally tell their comrades that they should just go back to the safe life of fighting muggers, mob bosses, and international terrorists and leave the Cosmic Threat To All Life In The Universe to the big boys.

Mjolnir: useful for those times when you have to drive a nail into granite

These flaws notwithstanding, Thor really is a fun film. My wife (i.e., the one who keeps giving chick flicks a chance but in the end seems to prefer movies like I, Robot (2004), The Dark Knight (2008), Iron Man (2008), X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009), etc.) really enjoyed the movie and is now looking forward to Captain America.
B+

Warhammer 40,000 and The Sixth Circle of Nerdom

2011-05-30T01:55:00.001-06:00

On Friday night I played my second game of Warhammer 40,000. This time we played a 1,000 point game as opposed to the 350 point game we played the first time (each individual figure has a point value; higher numbers mean more figures and/or more powerful figures). This time around my friend didn't pull (too many) punches and gave himself what he called a "Godzilla" army of Tyranids (giant Xenomorph-like aliens that are very hard to kill). Of course he swept my Space Marines off the board, but I managed to take out 700 points of his army (not too bad for my second game). I would have done a lot better but I made a few serious tactical errors and I had a horrible run of dice throws at a crucial moment. However, the fact that I wasn't absolutely slaughtered was encouraging and I became even more committed to enhancing my nerd status.

Welcome to the Seventh Circle

There are, of course, several different levels of nerdom; like Dante's Inferno, you could probably divide it into seven circles. Playing role-playing games (RPGs) and games like 40K has to place one in at least the sixth circle (online versions don't count; it has to be live with cards, books, figures, and/or dice). I imagine the seventh circle is reserved for those who actually dress up as their favorite characters or wear costumes from their favorite franchises.

Anyway, having determined to fully enter the sixth circle, I went to the local gaming store on Saturday to check out their prices on 40K models, rulebooks, and painting supplies. The store was filled with several people playing various games, including two individuals who were enthusiastically involved in some sort of card- and dice-based fantasy game. The gaming store setting (which was as cluttered and musty smelling as you would expect) and the patrons' clothing, mannerisms, and banter proved two things to me: 1) that Big Bang Theory rarely exaggerates in its depiction of its characters and 2) that there exists at least one place in the world that can overwhelm even me with pure, unadulterated geekiness. I almost laughed when one player's cell phone rang. His ringtone? Duel of the Fates from Star Wars: Episode I.

Star Wars is well represented in the Seventh Circle

After determining that Amazon.com had better prices than the game store, I went to a nearby HobbyTown USA. While their selection of 40K models and books was minimal, their variety of paints, brushes, and other supplies was excellent. Once I get June's allowance (I've talked about our allowance system before) I'll probably buy the 40K starter set, complete with basic rulebook, dice, and a generous number of figures, on Amazon.com. I can easily get the the paints and hobby supplies I need from HobbyTown. Unfortunately, it looks like the cost of getting into Warhammer 40,000 will initially be on par with that of collecting Lego Star Wars sets, although I expect it to taper off once I have the specialized rulebooks (a.k.a., codices) and a painted army or armies. I'll probably be enlarging my armies with special characters and vehicles over time, but the makers of 40K don't release new models at nearly the same rate that Lego does. Each addition or change to game pieces requires revision of the various codices, which would bring on the ire of the players.

This scene is roughly the same no matter where you go

Whenever I start to think that it's expensive to be a nerd these days, I remind myself that my more normal friends have motorcycles, over-sized trucks, and snowmobiles. I bet I could have a really awesome 40K army for the cost of a cheap motorcycle.

Warhammer 40,000

2011-05-27T12:06:00.000-06:00

I really didn't need a new hobby. I really do collect enough things: superhero and Godzilla toys, Star Trek books, Star Wars books and comics, etc. And my computer is loaded with wallpapers, icons, and sound clips from more geeky franchises than is healthy.

Swords, battle axes, and hand cannons: it's The Future!

For the past six months or so, the coworker who built my current computer has been trying to get me interested in the sci-fi tabletop game Warhammer 40,000 (a.k.a., 40K). My friend has been playing the game for years, but has had a hard time finding someone else to play with. Last year he started very subtly by dropping hints about working on a "special Christmas present". Then, knowing that I'm an inveterate sci-fi fan, he started discussing the backstory of the game and of the various armies. This culminated in him lending me the specialized rulebook for the "Black Templars" Space Marine chapter. Along with descriptions of various playing pieces, the rulebook was filled with an elaborate history of the Black Templars. Finally, I agreed to play the game.

A Black Templar

40K originally started as an ornate tabletop strategy game in which players build and paint their own figures and assemble customized armies. The game doesn't have any sort of board; any tabletop will do. Movement and weapons range are limited only by distance, making the use of a tape measure necessary. Characters, vehicles, and weapons have certain point values that indicate accuracy and power, close-in fighting ability, armor strength, etc. The figures are all highly customizable by the player, meaning that no two armies will be exactly the same. During the game, players maneuver their armies into position. Once close enough to begin combat, dice are rolled repeatedly to determine whether one figure is able to shoot another, whether that hit actually damages the target figure, and whether or not the targeted figure is protected by its armor. The figures' point values are used to weight the results obtained with the dice (a relatively high Ballistics Skill value of four, for example, means that a roll of only three or higher on a six-sided die is needed to hit the target). This is a basic description of long-distance fighting; there are other rules for close-in fighting.

Yes, he's carrying a chainsaw that's used as a sword

Originally, I wasn't interested in playing the game. Despite the fact that I've been an irredeemable nerd for as long as I can remember, I've never been interested in complicated strategy games like 40K. I had never even played a role-playing game (RPG) until grad school when a fellow graduate student convinced me to participate in a Star Wars RPG (the three or four times we played were actually pretty fun). So, as I was driving to my friend's house last Saturday, I was trying to come up with a good way to say that I didn't think that the game was for me, although 40K's backstory was interesting to me as a sci-fi fan and that I might read some of the 40K novels. When I arrived, he had prepared a small army of Raven Guard Space Marines and another of the Tau (an alien race). He patiently walked me through the rules and explained the tactics. Because of how he arranged the armies (and due to a few tactical "errors" on his part), I absolutely clobbered him. Before I left, he showed me the hundreds of game figures he's built over the years and generously gave me an unpainted Black Templar army.

Dreadnoughts are operated by severely wounded
Space Marines and serve as their life support system

Now I'm cursing my friend's name for introducing me to Warhammer 40,000. Not only did I enjoy the game, but I discovered on Saturday that 40K seemed to be designed for me. I loved building model airplanes when I was young; now I look forward to building and painting Warhammer 40,000 armies. And the way that the game replicates real aspects of combat strategy is very appealing since I've long been a military history enthusiast. Finally, the 40K universe seems to be aimed at a subset of geeks of which I am a part; it has a dystopian future in which humanity views its own technology with superstitious reverence and awe (similar to Asimov's Foundation series), a pseudo-medieval human society that has revived the Gothic style and which even outfits its elite warriors in suits of armor that resemble the most ornate varieties produced during the Dark Ages (despite their ancient appearance, the suits are actually power armor similar to that found in military sci-fi stories like Heinlein's Starship Troopers), an elaborate backstory that is on par with the Star Wars Expanded Universe, Space Marines who have a Klingon-like zeal for war and honor, a variety of alien and corrupted human adversaries, and even a host of demonic creatures inhabiting 40K's equivalent of hyperspace that would seem familiar to any fan of the early sci-fi horror of H.P. Lovecraft.

A Space Marine army and an Ork army

I really didn't mean to end up with a new obsession. But my friend was really persuasive and the product he was pushing was very appealing...

Kids and Fantasy Violence

2011-05-15T15:38:00.001-06:00

Yesterday afternoon I watched an episode of Mythbusters with my daughters. The episode tested the truth of the saying 'to slap some sense' into a person. They established their baseline by putting Grant through an obstacle course testing both cognitive abilities and reflexes and, later on, by putting Tory and Kari through a shooting range used for police training. After getting their baseline, they then impaired their performance by spending thirty minutes in a freezing room (Grant) or by combining sleep deprivation, fasting, and a thirty minute chill (Tory and Kari) and then repeating the test. Finally, they repeated the impaired test except that they slapped the person once across the face with a bungee-powered slapping machine beforehand. In all three cases the slap significantly compensated for the impairment, although they still fell short of their baseline. Apparently the slap initiated the fight-or-flight instinct that caused the improvement.

We got to see this over and over again in slow-motion

Later that evening, my older daughter and I watched Star Wars: The Clone Wars. In that particular episode, Anakin Skywalker's apprentice, Ahsoka, found herself and three other Jedi trainees being hunted by trandoshans (an intelligent reptilian species). The episode contained the typical amount of violence seen in the series: several characters were shot, the Jedi slammed trandoshans into boulders and bulkheads with the Force, characters kicked and punched each other, and two characters fell to their deaths (with one of them actually becoming impaled on a stalagmite).

Wookies and trandoshans have never gotten along

Later on I asked my daughter if she liked watching Mythbusters and if she thought it was funny when the mythbusters were being slapped by the machine. She thought about it for a moment and then said that the episode was okay but that she didn't like that Tory, Kari, and Grant were being hurt and that she had felt bad for them. When I asked if she liked the episode of The Clone Wars she got very excited and talked endlessly about how much she enjoyed it when the Jedi and the wookies were beating up the trandoshans. In fact, I believe that nearly all the trandoshans were dead by the end of the episode.

My daughter's reaction to the two different shows reminds me of a very interesting book I read several years ago called Killing Monsters. The book's subtitle declares that "children need fantasy, super heroes, and make-believe violence". The author, Gerard Jones, argues that children can generally distinguish between real violence and fantasy violence and that fantasy violence helps them to cope with the frightening things around them while also serving as an outlet for aggressive emotions. Jones goes even farther and suggests that children who are not allowed to relieve these emotions through make-believe violence may later seek out more realistic forms of it; e.g., extremely violent films and music, animal cruelty, or even by the infliction of it on their peers or family.

Several times I've seen parents or teachers get whipped into a panic because some preschool-aged boy pointed his finger at another child and said "bang, I shot you". Several cases of a "zero-tolerance policy" run amok have made nationwide news, with kids getting suspended from school for normal childhood behavior such as having a "simulated weapon" (this can include "finger guns" and inch long G.I. Joe action figure guns). It's as if these adults have completely forgotten that generations of children have pretended to shoot, stab, or bludgeon each other (some of the earliest identifiable toys were wooden swords used by Roman children) without becoming murderous psychopaths. One of Jones' strongest arguments is that the common presence of realistic toy guns among the baby-boomer generation didn't result in an epidemic of actual violence. And I think I can guarantee that the very adults responsible for many of these ridiculous zero-tolerance policies laughed years before when, as children watching Saturday morning cartoons, they saw Elmer Fudd blast Daffy Duck's beak off with a shotgun.

Although the mythbusters took the slaps in good humor, they obviously didn't enjoy them and my daughter didn't like watching real people get hurt. At the same time, she enjoyed the fantasy violence of Star Wars and later pretended that Son of Atomic Spud and I were Sith Lords and that she was slashing us up with a lightsaber. I wish that more adults were as mature about make-believe violence and as capable of distinguishing it from real violence as most children are.

Just to Show that I'm Not a Commercial Shill...

2011-05-13T16:52:00.001-06:00

In my review of the Green Lantern toys, I said that I wanted to get a Hal Jordan Green Lantern figure. Well, the Green Lantern action figures finally arrived at our local Walmart and my wife picked up the figure I wanted. The next time I accompany her to the store, I might just check out the other ones. From the back of Hal Jordan's box, it looks like they've also released Sinestro in his Green Lantern outfit.

Supervillains always seem to have more fun

In the comics (and I assume in the film as well) Sinestro was Hal Jordan's mentor. Of course any comic book character named "Sinestro" is going to end up as a supervillain sooner or later. After he used his ring to inspire fear and was banished, Sinestro returned with a yellow power ring that was effectively immune from the Green Lanterns' green rings. I wonder if this is going to be shown in Green Lantern or if it's going to be saved for a sequel.

Will two Green Lantern figures really be enough?

I don't know if Mattel sold any more Green Lantern merchandise because of my blog post, but they at least got a few bucks from me.

Shakedown Socialism Was Right

2011-05-07T12:21:00.000-06:00

Do you think that communism is dead? Do you think that Oleg Atbashian's fear that American unions are trying to veer our country towards communism is misplaced? Only a couple hours after posting my review of Atbashian's book, I came across this article: "SEIU drops mask, goes full commie".

Is this one even old enough to
know what real communism is?

That's right, a rally on May Day (i.e., the communist "International Worker's Day") in Los Angeles brought out the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the AFL-CIO, several teachers' unions, and organizations like the Communist Party, USA and the Young Communist League.

SEIU purple alongside communist red; seems about right to me

Did you know that the SEIU spent more money on Obama's 2008 election campaign than any other organization and that the SEIU president is a frequent visitor to the White House? If it's true that you can 'judge a man by the company he keeps', what does this say about Obama?

This assembly was not unusual; unions and socialist/communist organizations are often found walking side-by-side in such rallies.

(All photos from this link)

Book Review: Shakedown Socialism

2011-05-07T10:02:00.000-06:00

Shakedown Socialism by Oleg Atbashian

I mentioned this book last year as the product of one of my favorite political satirists and founder of the website "The People's Cube". Although I purchased the book shortly after that blog entry, only recently have I had the chance to read it.

Much of the book's content and opinion is similar to the writings of many other conservatives. However, Shakedown Socialism has a unique angle in that its author was born and raised within the Soviet Union; his observations on what is currently happening in America are informed by what he saw in Soviet Ukraine. Thus, what might otherwise be guesses or theories on the part of the average conservative writer are actually Atbashian's personal experiences.

At 124 pages of actual text, the book reads like an extended article. The author is immensely straightforward and to the point; many authors nowadays would probably have taken 200 or more pages to say what Atbashian does. Shakedown Socialism focuses primarily on the negative effects of collectivism on personal and economic freedom, with an emphasis on the influence of unions (chapter 1 is named after a Vladimir Lenin quote: "Trade Unions are the School of Communism"). While leftists decry the greed and selfishness of managers, business owners, and other "enemies", the author points out that personal greed tends to be much more rational and less detrimental to others' liberties than collective greed, which is often tainted with a mob mentality. Atbashian recognizes that the vast majority of union members are decent people, but he deplores what is being done in their name and with their dues money.

The author's primary concern is that the collectivism demonstrated by trade unions, government unions, organizations like ACORN, and others will eventually lead to a situation similar to what happened in the Soviet Union. In the USSR, such unions initially colluded with the government and aided it in growing its power. Shortly thereafter, the newly totalitarian state declared the independent unions to be obsolete and absorbed them into the state apparatus. Once part of the state, conditions and wages tended to be forced down to pre-union levels, union organizers became representatives of the state rather than of the union members, and strikes made workers "enemies of the people" (with the attendant consequences).

Shakedown Socialism is a quick read and is livened up with photos and reproductions of Soviet agitprop. Also included are some of Atbashian's images that originally appeared on The People's Cube. The author, a talented artist, actually produced propaganda for a local Party committee in the USSR. And as is apparent from both his website as well as this book, Atbashian is also a talented writer. Not only are his arguments clear and logical, but his grammar, sentence structure, and spelling are excellent. I know that it seems petty to praise these later items, but it indicates a thoroughness and care on the part of the author and his editor(s) that is too often lacking in books printed by mainstream presses (and many small publishers and self-publishers are absolutely horrible in this regard).
A-

Osama Bin Laden Dead

2011-05-02T21:35:00.000-06:00

It took nearly ten years, but they finally found and killed Osama Bin Laden. Apparently CIA intelligence found him hiding out in Pakistan and a team of SEALs was sent in after him. According to Foxnews.com:

The attack on the secret compound in Abottabad, Pakistan, was preceded by months of intelligence gathering and high-level meetings within the CIA. The agency discovered the compound in August while monitoring a trusted Al Qaeda courier. Nine months later, after rehearsing the raid for a week, a unit of specially trained SEALs stormed the compound and killed the Al Qaeda leader with a gunshot to the head.

It's a shame that, for their safety and that of their families, we'll probably never know those SEALs' names. I guess they'll have to be content with being the anonymous heroes for millions of Americans.

I hope those SEALs find a little extra in this month's paycheck

Given the circumstances, it was decided to bury Bin Laden's remains at sea. Since his burial place can't be turned into some perverse shrine or pilgrimage location, I think it's a great idea. At the same time, it seems absurd to me that President Obama found it necessary to insist that Bin Laden's body was being handled according to Islamic custom (wasn't Bin Laden's terrorism supposed to be considered "anti-Islamic activity" now?). Honestly, why was this even being emphasized? Are we afraid of reprisals or something? Al Qaeda was already killing Americans before we killed Bin Laden; are we afraid that now they're really going to try to kill Americans? I'm tired of Obama pandering to our enemies.

As it is, the burial at sea has plenty of Muslin clerics questioning it. One cleric, Sheik Ahmed al-Tayeb, said that the method of burial "runs contrary to the principles of Islamic laws, religious values and humanitarian customs." So, was Bin Laden's murder of thousands of civilians according to "the principles of Islamic laws, religious values and humanitarian customs"? Others say that the burial at sea disrespects the Muslim practice of pointing a body's head towards Mecca. What about the 9/11 hijackers or Bin Laden's suicide bombers? Those methods of death don't exactly leave one's corpse in the position to be pointing in any particular direction. Is it just me or do these radical clerics seem to be outraged by the wrong things? I think it's a safe bet that millions of Americans and Muslims who don't want Bin Laden to be associated with their religion don't really care how the murder's corpse was dispositioned.

One final thought: although Bin Laden's death is good news for the sane people of the world, anyone who thinks that this marks the end of terrorism by Al Qaeda or its ilk is hopelessly naive. That kind of fanaticism and hatred has existed since mankind was capable of expressing it and will certainly last until the Apocalypse.

The End

Video Game Review: Lego Star Wars III: The Clone Wars

2011-04-30T23:51:00.001-06:00

Our family has a Nintendo Wii, but I rarely play it. The biggest exception is when my wife and I buy a Lego game, which I can play for hours (I still haven't played Lego Harry Potter, though). After Cartoon Network started airing Star Wars: The Clone Wars, it became obvious that the show had introduced so many new characters, vehicles, and plot lines that they were bound to make a Lego Clone Wars. Since both the Lego and Star Wars franchises are still profitable, they did indeed release Lego Star Wars III: The Clone Wars. We bought it shortly after it was released and, after hours of playing it, I finally completed it on Saturday afternoon.

The gameplay is very similar to previous Lego games, although they've added some new features. In the previous Star Wars games, the Force performed predetermined actions, lightly pushed droids away, and could kill other characters (if one were playing a Dark Side character). In The Clone Wars the Force is a lot more flexible and allows you to throw droids and other objects at enemies. Jedi can also throw their lightsabers in the same way that the batarang was thrown in Lego Batman. The space combat levels in Lego Star Wars III are similar to those found in the first two Star Wars games, but also include portions where the player lands his or her ship to accomplish tasks or search for canisters. The Clone Wars also includes battlefield levels in which you can build up your own bases with cannons, shields, barracks, and vehicle landing zones while attempting to take over enemy bases. Other changes include the addition of golden objects (these can only be destroyed by characters with rapid fire weapons), sniper characters, and making it possible to construct playable characters from the rest of the Star Wars universe by collecting the ten canisters found in each level (Vader's Secret Apprentice is my favorite). These changes are welcome since the similarity between Lego games has threatened to make each subsequent release seem like more of the same.

The Lego designers also decided to change the level access hub. Although they avoided using the simple level access hub found in the prior Lego Star Wars games, the first Lego Indiana Jones, or Lego Batman, they also chose not to use the extensive (and occasionally confusing) hub style found in Lego Indiana Jones 2 or Lego Harry Potter. The hub in The Clone Wars consists of a Republic Star Destroyer and a Separatist warship. Like Lego Star Wars II and Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga, red bricks provide the player with a variety of extras. However, the red bricks are now hidden in the hub rather than in the levels. Thankfully, The Clone Wars doesn't have the huge number of pointless extras found in the previous Star Wars games; they're mostly limited to useful items. A variety of buyable characters can also be found wandering throughout the ships; the number of characters increases as they are unlocked in the levels. The player can fly from one ship to the next while the flight in between allows the player to complete more missions. The actual levels are accessed by holographic consoles found on either ship.

As usual the Lego designers have filled the game with clever references to both Star Wars as well as to some of their other game titles. For example, one canister is hidden behind a bookcase where you can also find Indiana and Henry Jones. A couple vehicles used in the levels appear to have come from Lego Batman. However, the funniest homage I found wasn't Star Wars-based at all. Sharp-eyed gamers will notice that one of the miscellaneous ground vehicles that shows up closely resembles the power loader used by Ellen Ripley to fight the alien queen in Aliens. This is particularly appropriate given that the "walker suit" is found in the level where the player must defeat the Geonosian queen.

Having played nearly all the Lego games, I was originally afraid that I would be bored with The Clone Wars. However, the game was kept interesting with its wide variety of characters, special abilities, and levels, as well as the way in which the game designers faithfully recreated the highlights of the first two seasons of Star Wars: The Clone Wars. However, like all other Lego games, The Clone Wars has an anticlimactic ending (no special cut scenes or fantastic final battles; you simply receive an unsatisfying "100%" completion rating). Additionally, the battlefield conquest levels, in which the player must conquer a series of planets, can get pretty tedious. The fact that you have to conquer all the planets for one side and then reconquer them for the other doesn't help matters. Finally, The Clone Wars suffers from glitches that occasionally cause the game to freeze up (I think I had four or five separate crashes over the course of the game). While the glitches aren't nearly as bad as those in the first Lego Indiana Jones, the game isn't quite as stable as Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga or Lego Batman.
B+

Gas Prices and the Obama Administration

2011-04-29T09:34:00.000-06:00

As gas prices skyrocket throughout the United States and the Obama Administration looks for a scapegoat, this article reminds us that this is exactly what key members of the Administration wanted. Obama has surrounded himself with advisers and cabinet secretaries that have stated that they would like to see gas prices go up.

"Thanks to my policies, Americans will enjoy ever higher gas prices."

While he was a senator from Colorado, current secretary of the interior, Ken Salazar, who's responsible for leasing out federal lands for oil exploration and drilling, implied in 2008 that he would rather see $10 a gallon gas than to actually allow more drilling in American territory:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell offered a measure to open up off-shore areas to new oil and natural gas drilling when the price of gas reached $4.50-per-gallon. Salazar objected. So McConnell changed it to $5-per-gallon. Salazar still objected.

And so on and so on it went until McConnell said $10-per-gallon.

Between 2007 and 2008, during discussions about global warming, Steven Chu (the current secretary of energy) said, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." At the rate we're going, it looks like you could get your wish, Steve.

Until recently Obama himself has seemed unconcerned about gas prices and has tried to blame a caricature of the average American for the problem. The President seems to believe that we're driving around in eight mile per gallon vehicles that need tune-ups. Recently Obama told the father of a large family in a townhall meeting, "If you’re complaining about the price of gas and you’re only getting eight miles a gallon, you know, you might want to think about a trade-in." A quick check on the Internet will show that even a huge Ford F-250 with a gasoline engine (which is less fuel efficient than a Diesel) tends to get better than 10 miles per gallon. Even a passenger van, which is the kind of vehicle many families with more than two kids are forced to drive, will get around 16 mpg in city driving and about 24 mpg on the freeway. Sedans can do even better. However, even those who drive the hybrids that Obama loves so much are suffering; not only are they paying higher gas prices as well, but they're also paying more for all the goods and services that are affected by higher gas prices.

In 2008, Obama actually said, "we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." Does anybody actually believe that we waste as much oil as could be extracted from American land by not inflating our tires and tuning up our cars? Many modern cars actually display a warning light if your tires drop below a certain pressure and internal combustion engines have become so optimized that tuneups are rarely necessary. So, what other sage advice does the man who travels on the taxpayers' dollar have to give us?

Now that Obama and co. seem to be getting what they wanted, why are they making a fuss over our current gas prices? Oh, that's right, it's hurting him politically among average Americans, despite the media's and the Administration's best efforts to place the blame somewhere else. Do we all remember when gas went up this high under Bush and the media rushed to blame his policies and his connections with oil companies? Now that the media's guy is in the White House (a man whose cabinet and policies seem to have been deliberately chosen to encourage high gas prices), the media is trying to blame anyone but Obama. This article has an interesting analysis of the media's bias.

Has any other administration been so nakedly hypocritical and been allowed to get away with it by its media lapdogs?

Green Lantern Toy Review

2011-04-23T21:32:00.000-06:00

Not too long ago I mentioned that I was going to give the upcoming Green Lantern movie a chance, even though I'm usually a Marvel Comics fan. Well, this longer trailer shown at Wondercon actually got me excited for the film:

Of course, in conjunction with the release of this film they're also making a series of Green Lantern-themed toys. My wife, who participates in what you could call "Internet-Age Advertising", applies to receive various free items in exchange for creating a buzz for them through blogging, house parties, etc. Knowing how much I like comic books and that I collect toys, she told me about the Mattel Green Lantern blog tour being hosted by Dad Central Consulting. I applied for the promotion, although I thought it was a long shot since they were mostly looking for dads with sons between 3 and 11 and I had stated that I only have girls around those ages. Perhaps they were swayed by the fact that I collect toys for myself. Anyway, I was sent two Green Lantern toys to review and will receive an Amazon gift code as a small added incentive to review them (the exciting legalese can be found at the end of this post!). Don't tell Dad Central Consulting, but I would have done it just for the free toys.

A Green Lantern figure (Hal Jordan in this picture) and the Colossal Cannon

Green Lantern Figure

But, it's not a collectible if
it's taken out of the box!

As shown in the trailer, the Green Lanterns are an intergalactic brotherhood of peacekeepers. Each has a ring that gives him or her various powers, including the ability to give physical form to the ring holder's thoughts. So many Green Lanterns, so many characters to make into action figures! Dad Central sent me the Abin Sur figure (the dying purple alien from the trailer that's played by Temuera Morrison; a.k.a. Jango Fett!), who comes with a removable mace.

"In brightest day, in blackest night..."

The packaging is pretty clever; the Green Lantern Oath made famous by the comics and found in the movie encircles the figure. Unfortunately, reviewing this figure required me to remove it from the packaging and actually let my daughter play with it, which was very difficult for me to do. Along with the mental construct, the figure comes with a fairly movie-accurate power ring. It's too small for my fat fingers, and a bit too big for my my oldest daughter's fingers (she's 8), but it would probably fit a 10 year old boy (the target demographic, although my tomboyish daughter thinks the ring and the figure are "cool"). And yes, like the geeks on the Big Bang Theory, I want a power ring for myself. Of course their $395 model also came with a lantern.

Disclaimer: Power ring does
not give user superpowers

As you can see from the photo below, the action figure is a little bit bigger than a typical Star Wars toy (this is my daughter's since mine are still in their packaging). Abin Sur has fewer points of articulation than a Star Wars figure (the head turns, the arms rotate up, down, and out, the legs move at the hips, and he turns at the waist) but the lack of joints actually produces a nicer looking figure that stands on its own more easily. And when you have a bunch of boys playing with superhero figures, the fact that you have less joints to break is a plus. The figure is highly detailed and has been given a decent paint job. He even has a noticeable power ring on his right hand.

Padmé Amidala versus Abin Sur: who will win?

I liked the action figure enough that my wife is keeping an eye out for when the figures from Green Lantern hit the local Walmart. I would like a Hal Jordan (i.e., the human Green Lantern) to go with Abin Sur, and a few of the other figures like Isamot Kol look pretty nifty, too.

Green Lantern Colossal Cannon
My girls started fighting over this one before I even got it out of the packaging. It's a cannon that's apparently meant to emulate this scene from the movie:

I bet a power ring-spawned minigun never runs out of ammo

Do all little girls like guns as much as mine?

Like any of the Green Lantern power ring constructs, the cannon is mostly a translucent green. A stylized hand wearing a power ring is mounted on the underside. When the user pulls a large trigger mounted inside the center of the barrel, the barrel rotates, portions of the gun and the power ring glow, the cannon makes a satisfying firing noise (although the sound can be turned off in deference to mom's sanity), and a disc is launched. The discs spin like a Frisbee when they leave the barrel, which gives them a good range without having too high an exit velocity. I was able to launch a disc an impressive 25 feet.

I didn't realize that the power ring
lights up until she shot me with it

I had a pretty good time chasing down my daughters with the cannon, and our gun-loving 6 year old daughter (she loves our Star Wars E-11 blaster) quickly emptied the 10 disc reservoir on her sisters. This episode revealed the only problem with the Colossal Cannon; the discs are a light translucent green and are easily lost if you don't pay attention to where they end up. I hope Mattel will be selling replacement disc packs. And since the kids will almost certainly be fighting over it, you'd probably have to buy more than one.

Unfortunately for the one with the E-11, the blaster only makes noise

"Let you have it? Oh, I'll let you have it, all right."

My wife's scared that I'm going to start another collecting binge.

Now behold! The promised disclosure statement:
I wrote this review while participating in a blog tour by Dad Central Consulting on behalf of Mattel and received Green Lantern toys to facilitate my review and a gift code to thank me for taking the time to participate.

Miscellanea

2011-04-18T22:17:00.000-06:00

On Competence
When did mere competence become the new excellence? I was recently thanked by my manager for doing a relatively simple task on time and without being reminded. I told him that I was simply doing my job, which actually flustered him a little. His response was, "well, thank you for doing your job, then." Has our society sunk so low that a demonstration of basic proficiency and the initiative to fulfill one's tasks without managerial oversight have become praiseworthy?

Do I really need a reason to include a picture of the Hulk?

On Real Value
Hobbies, pastimes, and entertainment should be the spice of life, not the purpose of it. Too often we fill our time with, and spend our money on, things that are of little lasting value. TVs, cars, toys, politics, etc., while fine in and of themselves, are unlikely to bring a person genuine happiness. On a completely unrelated note, this past Saturday I spent fourteen hours playing Lego Star Wars III.

And Speaking of Toys...
The state of the economy is being lamented nationwide, yet the release of each new video game system, iPhone, iPad, or whatnot is met with long lines and record sales. Big screen 3D TVs are selling pretty well and big budget movies are still making huge amounts of money even though theater tickets cost as much nowadays as DVDs did just a few years ago. Is the economy not really as lousy as some make it out to be or are Americans just that bad with controlling their spending habits and prioritizing their finances? I assume it's the latter.

On Video Game Music
When did video game music become as good as the music you find in movies? Not long ago I found out that big name movie score composers like Hans Zimmer and Steve Jablonsky were writing video game music on the side. It turns out that many video game companies don't skimp on their scores; many are every bit as good as you would expect from a big budget film. It also turns out that some of the newer film score composers like Jablonsky (Transformers (2007)) and Michael Giacchino (Star Trek (2009)) actually got their start writing video game music. Having discovered how good game scores have gotten, I've since bought the scores for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Call of Duty: Black Ops, Gears of War 2, and a few others.

On Public Memorials
Can anyone tell me what this is supposed to be?

This is a memorial?

Yes, I know it's the Pentagon's September 11th memorial, but what is it supposed to be? Why must today's memorials be exercises in the pointless field of modern art? The proposed Ground Zero and Flight 93 memorials are further examples of meaninglessness. I know that the "artists" claim that they mean something, but if the hacks have to explain what it is then it's a failure as a memorial. I'm sure there are still some real artists available; maybe our public officials could hire them.

This is a memorial

Book Review: A Patriot's History of the United States

2011-04-15T16:01:00.000-06:00

A Patriot's History of the United States by Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen

I think it's fair to say that U.S. history as taught to my grandparents was at least somewhat whitewashed. The Founding Fathers were granted demigod status and America was perpetually the land of the free and the home of the brave. Some have called this the "My Country, Right or Wrong" approach. By the 1960s, however, the attitude towards American history underwent a complete revolution. Unfortunately, this new approach didn't offer a more accurate or balanced view; it was just as dogmatic as the old one (maybe even more so) but it reversed the narrative. Instead of the nation that could do no wrong, America could do no right. The Founding Fathers became hypocritical opportunists whose efforts at nation-building were motivated by the desire to benefit their social and economic class. They were branded as racists; intolerant and oppressive of the (invariably) peaceful Native Americans and all other races. Even those founding fathers who were anti-slavery were condemned as sellouts for tabling the issue at the Philadelphia Convention and signing a constitution that acknowledged the continued existence of slavery. This is the "My Country, Always Wrong" approach.

Keep it next to your copy of
the Communist Manifesto!

Although these attitudes have crept into a significant portion of the literature and text books on American history, the writings of Howard Zinn (who was outed as a communist shortly after his death) are among the most widely read. His most popular book, A People's History of the United States, is often used as a text book or is assigned reading in college American history classes. For those who are reasonably well versed in politics and history, the use of the term "people's" in the title of Zinn's book will immediately indicate that the text will have a certain lean to it ("people's" is often used in the names of communist nations or organizations; e.g., "People's Republic of China", China's "People's Liberation Army", the communist "People's Republic of Hungary" or the "People's Republic of Poland").

This brings us to A Patriot's History of the United States by historians Schweikart and Allen. The book is intended to be a remedy to the "My Country, Always Wrong" mentality while also trying to avoid the opposite extreme. The authors say this about their book:

[W]e reject "My Country, Right or Wrong," but we equally reject "My Country, Always Wrong." I think you'll find us quite critical of such aspects of our past — such as the Founders' unwillingness to actually act on slavery on at least three separate occasions; or about Teddy Roosevelt's paternalistic regulations and his anti-business policies. On the other hand, as conservatives, we nevertheless destroy the myth that FDR "knew" about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance. Instead, we try to always put the past in the context of the time — why did people act then as they did, and was that typical?

It is the authors' belief that "if the story of America's past is told fairly, the result cannot be anything but a deepened patriotism, a sense of awe at the obstacles overcome, the passion invested, the blood and tears spilled, and the nation that was built." In short, the authors are trying to counter what they see as leftist distortions of the history of the United States while telling a more balanced story of the nation.

Although the authors strive for balance, I believe that the philosophy that it impossible for an historian to be unbiased can clearly be seen in A Patriot's History. The mere act of determining what material will be included in an history, of deciding from what angle to approach the subject, or of selecting among contradicting historical accounts will always reflect the opinions or biases of the historian. In the case of Schweikart's and Allen's book, there tends to be an emphasize on the benefits of small government, the general virtue of the nation (while admitting that there are many flaws), and the beneficial effects of the free market. For example, in their discussion of the Trail of Tears (in which the Cherokee were forcibly driven out of Georgia and into Oklahoma), the authors point out that the Cherokee were evicted from their lands because President Andrew Jackson exceeded his Constitutional authority. Congress had not granted Jackson the right to displace the Cherokee while the Supreme Court had explicitly ruled in Worcester v. Georgia that the Cherokee's land rights could not be legally violated. The authors emphasize that a) the Cherokee's rights were violated by a president who repeatedly expanded executive authority and b) that the tribe's land rights were affirmed by the Supreme Court, which obviously didn't hold the Cherokee's race against them.

While the authors generally defend America, they have little compunction in pointing out where America has fallen short of its promise or ideals, particularly with regards to slavery or racism. The most interesting idea presented in the book echoes a statement made by John Adams: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Adams firmly believed that a free society of limited government couldn't exist unless its citizens practiced self-restraint. The authors suggest that the growth of the federal government and the associated reductions in personal liberty were often the result of the moral failings of the American people:

As with much of the history of slavery and racism in America, the desegregation of schools ultimately had required a perversion of the apparatus of the state in order to get people to act responsibly and justly. The Founders never imagined in their wildest dreams that federal courts would be determining the makeup of student bodies in a local high school, yet the utter collapse of the state legislative process to act morally — or at the very least, even effectively — pushed the courts into action. It was a cautionary tale. At every point in the past, the continued refusal of any group to abide by a modicum of decency and tolerance inevitably brought change, but also brought vast expansions of federal power that afflicted all, including the groups that initially benefited from the needed change.

A Patriot's History of the United States is an excellent resource for anyone who is looking for a response to leftist depictions of America's past or who simply wants a general overview of U.S. history. Since the authors didn't set out to write a text book, A Patriot's History doesn't read like one; it is much more engaging than most books one may have read in an American history class. I have but one minor complaint; the text seems to be a bit too informal in places, which can make it harder to take the authors seriously.
A-

The GOP's Path to Prosperity

2011-04-09T11:40:00.002-06:00

As our national debt spirals out of control, there seems to be very few in our Federal Government who are willing to take responsibility for it. The debt has gotten so bad that I don't think there's anyone in the government who would argue that it doesn't need to be addressed. Unfortunately, as demonstrated during the recent debates that nearly shut down the government, the Democrats in Congress aren't serious about cutting the deficit. The Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D., Nev) is probably the worst of the lot. Reid is so clueless that he thinks Federal dollars should be spent on things like cowboy poetry festivals and that Social Security doesn't need to be addressed for another 20 years. The video below, which specifically discusses Obamacare, may give a better idea about the effect that entitlement spending (e.g., Social Security, Medicare) will have on our budget within significantly less than 20 years:

Reid and his ilk are behaving like spoiled children who don't seem to fully understand that their toys and activities cost money that mommy and daddy just don't have anymore (cowboy poetry festivals?). And yes, I am including the Bush-era Republicans that started the current spending spree in my blanket condemnation (although they were frugal compared to the Obama-era Congress). The current crop of Democrats seems to understand that they can't spend money like this forever, but they a) don't have the guts to actually do the cutting and to potentially anger the equally spendthrift special interest groups that helped to elect them in the first place (how angry will they be when there's simply no money?) and b) their financial policies are so wrong-headed (e.g., the Stimulus) that it's obvious that many in Congress don't actually know how economics work. Keynesian economic theory, wherein the Federal Government attempts to stimulate the economy through massive deficit spending, has never worked. Supply-side economics, on the other hand, have worked brilliantly under both John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan (see Larry Schweikart's and Michael Allen's A Patriot's History of the United States). However, supply-side economics are disdained by the Left because they require that tax cuts be extended to corporations and the wealthy (i.e., those who actually produce jobs and economic growth), which is contrary to the Left's dogma of fomenting class-envy.

Fortunately, there are a few adults in Congress; Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget, has proposed the Path to Prosperity. The plan is an attempt to rein in Federal spending and to put America back on a sound financial footing. Ryan knows exactly where the blame for the deficit belongs:

The U.S. government is not running sustained deficits because Americans are taxed too little. The government is running deficits because it spends too much.

Since the Path to Prosperity would actually change the way the Federal Government does business, the party of the status quo (i.e., the Democrats) have done nothing but villify the GOP in general and Ryan in particular (see here and here). Democrats shriek that Ryan's plan would "end Medicare as we know it" (Medicare? You mean the program that's headed towards bankruptcy if it isn't altered?) and that it would "literally be a death trap for seniors" (if implemented the plan wouldn't affect the benefits of those over age 55, plus Social Security is in the same leaky boat as Medicare). They complain that it would be "a road to riches for big oil" (are Congressional Democrats even capable of making an argument that isn't based on class-envy?). Other than increase oil drilling (and thus reduce our dependence on foreign oil), oil companies would only benefit as much as every other company since Ryan's plan would lower the industrial world's highest corporate tax rate.

So, other than vilifying those who are actually working on a way to save our children and grandchildren from monstrous debt, what is the Congressional Democrats' plan to address the deficit? Well, they don't actually have one. The closest thing they've got is a vague notion to increase taxes, especially on those eeeeevil rich people who have the nerve to create jobs and pay most of the taxes (yet another plan based on class-envy; does the Left have any imagination?). Yes, the Democrats actually think that a nation can tax itself into prosperity; I dare anybody to show me a time when this has actually worked. Of course, when you tax the people and companies that make jobs, you decrease the number of jobs they can make and you create disincentives for them to create economic growth, thus decreasing the amount of money you can squeeze out of them. This is a perfect example of the Law of Unintended Consequences; a principal which the Democrats in Congress refuse to understand.

Unfortunately, given that the Democrats cry over cutting a miniscule percentage of the budget, it's unlikely that Ryan's proposal will be written into law anytime soon. I have to agree with Ryan's statement:

[N]early every fiscal expert and advisor in Washington has warned that a major debt crisis is inevitable if the U.S. government remains on its current unsustainable path. The government’s failure to prevent this completely preventable crisis would rank among history’s most infamous episodes of political malpractice.

I recommend that everyone read Ryan's Path to Prosperity and that they encourage their political leaders to seriously consider its proposals. Certain political leaders, such as Harry Reid, may have to be "encouraged" by replacing them with those who are more serious about America's future.

To My Motorcycle-Riding Neighbor

2011-04-08T10:38:00.000-06:00

Dear Neighbor,

Once again we find ourselves entering springtime. Although we've had some light snow recently, most of the winter snow is gone and the ice on the street has finally melted. While I'm certainly going to miss the winter season, I think most people in the neighborhood are looking forward to warmer weather. I believe I heard you celebrating the change of the seasons Wednesday night between 11:30PM and 12:00AM when you spent ten straight minutes revving your @#$%^*! motorcycle, roared down your street, and then returned twenty minutes later to rev your engine some more.

     Now, I know that you're not my only motorcycle-loving neighbor. Since I hate noise, I don't like it when they ride their over-loud toys around either. However, when the other neighbors ride their bikes after work on a weekday or during daylight hours on the weekend, I know that my noise-aversion is my own idiosyncrasy and is not the fault of my neighbors.

     Here's the difference between you and them; they do it during the day, and you do it after 11:00PM on a weekday. I'm sure you know that many of your neighbors work at the national laboratory about 60 miles out of town and have to wake up around 4:30AM in order to get dressed and catch an early morning bus. As it is, I typically get about 6 hours of sleep. This past Wednesday, thanks to your joyriding, I slept for only 4 hours. I hope you can see why your motorcycle has become a source of irritation.

     Between last year's evening rides and this past Wednesday, I've noticed that you endlessly rev your engine whether your bike has been sitting all winter or for a single day. I can't imagine that this is necessary for the proper operation of your motorcycle and can only believe that you do this at 11:30PM on a weekday because you like to. I'm afraid that the degree of thoughtlessness and discourtesy you've shown toward your neighbors has made you my implacable nemesis. I therefore must warn you that, when exposure to gamma radiation finally gives me the telekinetic superpowers that I've wanted for so long, I'm going to blow up your motorcycle with my mind.

Sincerely,
Your Sleep-deprived Neighbor

More Baseless Nuclear Panic

2011-04-07T22:31:00.000-06:00

Thanks to the Fukushima accident, my coworkers and I have found ourselves fielding questions from friends and family because the media has been too busy sensationalizing and ax-grinding to do some basic research. I've tried to summarize the relevant information on this page. Unfortunately, there seems to be more panic among Americans than among the much more stalwart Japanese.

The latest unfounded fears I've come across are coming out of Boise, Idaho. Due to the Fukushima accident, elevated levels of the radioactive isotope iodine-131 were found in Boise's rainfall and drinking water. Of course, this has some people panicking. "Anonymous Coward" posted this on one forum:

We are going to get a very concentrated dose of radioactive materials tomorrow in Boise, Idaho PLUS a 90% chance of rain. Cesium 137 was detected here by air filter and rainwater. The next three days if not longer are going to be bad but it looks like only tomorrow will be raining.

Should I keep my child home from school tomorrow? Am I overreacting? Wwyd? P.S. Yesterday I felt fine, today I have feelings in my throat and a weird headache and it's raining.

Others in the forum advised the poster to keep her child out of the rain due to "high levels of iodine 131", to treat her drinking water with various "detoxification" substances, or to allow her child out in the rain to build up a tolerance because "she has many years of exposure to come." How can we have nearly all of mankind's knowledge at our fingertips thanks to the Internet and yet keep finding absurd advice like this?

It doesn't take a whole lot of research to show that Anonymous Coward's throat problems and "weird headache" are psychosomatic and not the result of radiation sickness. First of all, let's review the actual report that has some people scared. Here's the EPA's statement on precipitation from April 4, 2011:

[P]recipitation data collected in several states show elevated levels of radiation in recent precipitation events. In all cases these are levels above the normal background levels historically reported in these areas. While short-term elevations such as these do not raise public health concerns – and the levels seen in rainwater are expected to be relatively short in duration – the U.S. EPA has taken steps to increase the level of monitoring of precipitation, drinking water, and other potential exposure routes to continue to verify that. (emphasis mine)

Despite the EPA's statement that there is no public health concern, many people seem to have focused on the report's table stating that 242 pCi/L was measured in the local precipitation on March 22 (the level of cesium-137 was about 20 times lower). My coworkers and I have had a good laugh that this number has caused an uproar among some people. The pCi (pronounced "picocurie", meaning 1/1,000,000,000,000 of a curie) is an extremely small quantity of radioactivity, especially when diluted in a liter (L) of water. When we talk about contaminated water at work, we use units of µCi/mL (1/1,000,000 of a curie in 1 milliliter of water) because a pCi/L is such a small amount (1 µCi/mL is a billion times more than 1 pCi/L).

Not understanding what a small amount of radioactivity 242 pCi/L is, someone took that number, divided it by the EPA drinking water limit of 3 pCi/L for iodine-131, and then declared that "Boise rainwater has highest levels of radioactive material… 80 times amount of I-131 allowed in drinking water." Once again, someone has either failed to do their research or is deliberately trying to scare people.

Drinking Water versus Precipitation
Notice that the above calculation confuses precipitation with drinking water. The rain that has fallen since the Fukushima incident makes up only a small percentage of Boise's drinking water. So how much radioactive iodine has actually been found in the drinking water? From the EPA's April 4, 2011 statement on drinking water:

Drinking water samples from two locations, Boise, Idaho and Richland, Washington, showed trace amounts of Iodine-131 – about 0.2 picocuries per liter in each case. Even an infant would have to drink almost 7,000 liters of this water to receive a radiation dose equivalent to a day’s worth of the natural background radiation exposure we experience continuously from natural sources of radioactivity in our environment. (emphasis mine)

Even after the "very concentrated dose" of radioactivity in the rainwater on March 22, the drinking water in Boise contained a paltry 0.20 pCi/L on March 28. This isn't 80 times greater than the allowed EPA limit, it's 15 times less than the limit. And since iodine-131 has a half-life of about 8 days, the quantity of radioactive iodine will significantly decline over the coming weeks and months.

Conservatism of the EPA Limit
It's unfortunate that the unit of measurement used throughout the Fukushima crisis has been 'X times (normal levels, regulatory limits, etc.)'. I understand that this is an attempt to give people a sense of scale, but since most don't actually know the levels at which radiation or radioactivity become dangerous (and the media doesn't seem to be in a hurry to tell them) you end up with people who are in possession of the facts but don't know what they mean. For example, ten times the normal radiation levels sounds scary until you realize that normal radiation levels are nearly 100,000 times lower than the levels at which the signs of acute radiation sickness appear (the average American receives about 1 millirem (0.001 rem) per day from normal background radiation, while radiation sickness generally occurs after receiving about 100 rem).

The EPA's limit for iodine-131 in the drinking water is an average annual level of 3 pCi/L "so the public radiation dose will not exceed 4 millirem". The limit was chosen as one that was so low that a person could ingest it every day from infancy to old age with no statistically detectable ill effects. Like so many other EPA limits, this number is relatively arbitrary. Although levels vary, the Department of Energy has estimated that the average American receives 360 millirem/year due to background radiation (some have estimated even higher levels due to the increased use of certain medical technologies). The 4 millirem that one could get from drinking water containing the EPA limit of iodine-131 would therefore account for a mere 1% of the radiation a person would normally receive. Even if the scary '80 times the EPA limits for drinking water' were accurate, and if it were assumed (unrealistically) that levels in the water would remain elevated for a whole year, people in Boise would only receive an extra 320 millirem per year (4 millirem times 80) from the contaminated water. Compare that to the 5,000 millirem per year that nuclear workers are allowed to receive per Federal law. Also per Federal law, a pregnant nuclear worker is allowed to receive 500 millirem for the duration of the pregnancy. These Federal limits are what workers may receive beyond normal background exposure. In short, even in an unrealistic worse case scenario, the people of Boise would receive lower radiation doses than have been shown to be safe for unborn children (320 millirem versus 500 millirem).

Precedence
A brief review of the data shows that the 242 pCi/L of iodine-131 found in Boise's rainwater are less than the levels found after the Chernobyl accident in 1986. On May 8, 1986, 460 pCi/L were found in the rainwater in Portland, Oregon. On May 10, 530 pCi/L were found in Las Vegas, Nevada and 270 pCi/L were found in Olympia, Washington. In Ottawa, Canada even higher levels were found; samples taken on May 7, 1986 found 1,647 pCi/L in the rainwater. These levels were all higher than those found in the United States following the Fukushima accident, yet there were no cases of radiation sickness nor was there a noticeable increase in cancer rates in North America. According to the EPA, such levels are low enough that they "pose no threat to human health or the environment."

Even the contamination spread by the Chernobyl disaster is dwarfed by the amount of radioactive fallout produced by years of nuclear testing between the late 1940s and the early 1960s. The United States alone performed 331 nuclear weapons tests above ground (and even more underground). Many of these tests were conducted in Nevada, about 100 miles from Las Vegas, while the largest tests were performed in the Pacific. The Soviet Union conducted 715 tests, often without regard for the health of those living nearby. One Soviet test involved the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated (50 megatons versus the 15 megatons of America's Castle Bravo test). Each of these above ground tests blasted huge quantities of radioactive materials into the stratosphere. Since humanity somehow managed to survive almost twenty years of fallout resulting from the nuclear arms race, I think it's safe to say that Anonymous Coward of Boise, Idaho and her child will tolerate the radioactivity spread by the Fukushima accident just fine (I'm not sure how well she'll handle the psychosomatic effects, though).

Castle Romeo vs. Fukushima: which do you think caused more fallout?

In conclusion, as I've said before (here and here), the levels of contamination reaching the United States are very low and present a negligible risk to human health. Unfortunately, members of the American public who have little to no knowledge of nuclear power (e.g., Anonymous Coward) have latched onto numbers that seem large and have started to panic. This hasn't been helped by those who have taken a single day's measurement of radioactivity in rainfall (which yielded a number with units that they don't understand) and have compared it to a regulatory limit for drinking water (without understanding the origin of the limit or how that limit compares to actual biological effects). Rather than try to confirm or correct their perceptions using the power of the Internet, these people gather on various forums to scare each other instead. I find myself wondering how many of these people drive without wearing a seatbelt.

Book Review: Kite

2011-04-03T13:19:00.001-06:00

Kite by Bill Shears

Sometime in the mid- to late 22nd century, the spaceship Kite is the last of the Earth Orbital Maintenance (EOM) sky sweepers. Piloted in shifts by two EOM employees, Dash and Christine, Kite's massive nets gather debris from the high-traffic Orbit #1. The ship processes the debris and casts the resulting lumps into Earth's atmosphere to burn up. The increasingly rare larger objects are sliced to pieces by high-powered lasers prior to processing. Although sky sweeping lacks the glory of early space travel, it's vitally important to prevent potentially lethal collisions between space trash and spacecraft (orbiting debris are a serious concern even in our sparsely populated early-21st century skies).

Since Kite is mostly automated, Dash typically sleeps through his three month shifts. However, the end of one shift proves to be unusually eventful when he discovers that the long-abandoned International Space Station II (ISS II) has been illegally re-occupied. It turns out that Dash is being kept in the dark by his own organization; Christine and Dash's boss, Martin, are part of a conspiracy involving the old station. In fact, the four intruders on the ISS II (Mona, Ling, Lumumba, and Trevor) were smuggled into orbit by Christine herself during shift changeovers.

A space shuttle radiator damaged by space debris

Back on Earth, Dash begins to research the ISS II and develops a plan to flush the trespassers out and to determine their intentions (he believes them to be terrorists). In this he is aided by his virtual guide, Sheila. Starting out her existence as a simple commercial program intended for entertainment, Sheila has since been modified by Janet, genius programmer and Dash's wife, into a continuously evolving artificial intelligence. Meanwhile, a more Darwinian form of evolution has taken place in Kite's long-neglected computer system. Due to exposure to various stimuli during their decades in orbit, and influenced by interaction with human pilots, the various functions, modules, and processes have begun to take on human-like traits and to resemble a human society. One particular bit of code that originally controlled a handful of icons begins to consume other programs and to usurp ever higher levels of computer control, eventually challenging Kite's Main Process itself.

Three months later, Dash returns to orbit despite Christine's and Martin's attempts to delay the beginning of his shift. Hoping to help in Dash's plan, Sheila downloads herself onto Kite's computer. She immediately attracts the rogue program's attention (which, being inspired by the name "Sheila", decides to name itself "He_Ra"). By the story's climax He_Ra finds that his rise to power has made him unpopular with the other computer entities on Kite, the purpose of the four trespassers is revealed, and a significant difference between the goals of the conspirators on the ground and the goals of those in orbit becomes apparent. Oh, and there's a space alien (no, this is not a spoiler).

Shears' first novel gets several things right. First of all, in an era when movies with an hour and a half of plot run for over two hours and books with 200 pages of story run for 400, Kite has an efficient length of just over 200 pages and manages to be a quick read. This is aided by the tongue-in-cheek tone of the novel; it's somewhat reminiscent of Douglas Adams' writing, but without the surrealism. Thankfully, the author avoids leaning on the thesaurus like so many of the less experienced franchise sci-fi authors (I'm currently reading an otherwise excellent Star Trek novel that actually uses the word "mellifluous"). Also to the author's credit is the fact that he isn't so enamored of his imaginary world that he feels the need to give us a hyper-detailed description of the sky sweeper or an excessive amount of back story or exposition (I've complained about this before). Like Dan Simmons, Shears maintains a good balance of worldbuilding, plot, and character development. This is an impressive accomplishment given that many first-time sci-fi or fantasy authors are tempted to focus almost exclusively on the gimmick of their story or imaginary world to the detriment of story and characters. Finally, the novel has a satisfying and logical conclusion, a disgustingly described alien (always a plus), and a couple explosions (you can't go wrong with a good explosion).

Earth from orbit

Of course, this being a first novel, Kite can be expected to stumble in a few places. None of the shortcomings ruin the overall plot or are fundamental flaws, but they do detract from the story. Plot-wise, the biggest misstep may be the early introduction of the alien, Troy, and the revelation of his intentions. By prematurely bringing the alien into the story and giving us an indication of his designs for Earth, much of the mystery and suspense that the author develops early on (and which are among the novel's strengths) as well as the impact of the finale are lessened. Given that Troy has little to do until the final 30 or so pages, it would have been more effective for the author to gradually introduce the alien's involvement near the mid-point of the plot and to save the amount of detail we're given in the beginning of the story for the final few chapters.

As for the narration, the story could benefit from expressing only one character's point of view (e.g., their internal thoughts and feelings) at a time. Kite has the disconcerting habit of giving us the viewpoint of two or more characters in the same paragraph. Although this approach has the virtue of letting the reader into the mind of all the characters all the time, it also lacks the intimacy of a limited point of view and prevents the reader from relating to any particular character. Compare this to Dan Simmons' technique: in Hyperion the reader is not initially allowed to see the point of view of private detective Brawne Lamia, who comes across as a gruff, ill-tempered, and vaguely dangerous person. However, when her story is told and we see the world through her experiences, the reader begins to see her as one of the most sympathetic characters in the series. In fact, my attitude towards several characters in Hyperion changed completely as Simmons gradually revealed the thoughts and feelings of each over the course of the novel. The sequel, The Fall of Hyperion, similarly limits itself to expressing only one character's point of view at a time, usually switching the viewpoint character from one chapter to the next. By the end of the two books, the reader feels like he or she knows each of the major characters intimately.

A couple more minor comments: Various characters, especially Dash, use slang that would seem dated in the 21st century (e.g., "see ya in the funny pages"); I can't imagine these would be used in the late 22nd century. I guess I'm being hypocritical here since I enjoy using archaic phrases myself ("huzzah" really is a word that should be used more often). There are also several instances in which the author forgets that the distances involved should result in most objects appearing very small (Star Trek often neglected this principle for dramatic reasons). At one point Christine is able to look out one of Kite's viewports and see people through a window of the ISS II. Since the side-mounted sweeper nets of Kite seem to be about a mile in width, this would mean that the pilot was somehow able to see people in a darkened window over a mile away. This is a minor detail that even well-experienced authors might overlook, but for the obsessive compulsive among us (and sci-fi seems to have more than its fair share of obsessive compulsive readers) it tends to stretch the reader's suspension of disbelief.

See what I mean?

Despite a few minor issues, overall, Kite is an entertaining story with an interesting setting, likable characters, and several good ideas. And in the end, that's essentially what I look for in a science fiction novel.
B

(Full disclosure: in return for an agreement to review it, I received an autographed copy of this book. A free book in exchange for a review, which I enjoy writing anyway, seemed like a pretty good deal to me.)

Movie Review: The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra (2001)

2011-03-31T21:05:00.001-06:00

It's obvious from watching The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra that Larry Blamire has seen more 1950s b-movies than is healthy. Like the H. P. Lovecraft Society's The Call of Cthulhu (2005), The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra is designed to look like it was made in the period in which the story takes place. Unlike Cthulhu, which is a serious and relatively faithful adaptation of Lovecraft's story, Lost Skeleton serves as a spoof of films from the era.

The brilliant scientist Dr. Paul Armstrong and his wife Betty take to the woods in search of a meteor laden with the rare radioactive substance known as "atmospherium". Once they find it, they take it to their rented cabin in order to study it. Little do they realize that their discovery was noticed by Kro-Bar and Lattis, two aliens from the planet Marva who need to replenish their spacecraft's fuel supply (which happens to be atmospherium). Out of desperation, the two aliens decide to take it by deception. While the aliens are relatively harmless, their pet mutant who escaped during the crash has begun to commit a series of "horrible mutilations". The aliens aren't the only ones who want the atmospherium, though; the evil scientist Dr. Roger Fleming intends to use it to reanimate the titular "Lost Skeleton of Cadavra" as part of an entirely unexplained plot to take over the world.

No scientist is complete without his trusty Geiger counter

Kro-Bar and Lattis use their "transmutatron" to make themselves look human (it changes their metallic spacesuits into a suit and a dress respectively) and get themselves invited to dinner at the cabin. Dr. Fleming, who knows about the aliens, also decides to drop in on the Armstrongs. Since he thinks he'll look suspicious if he arrives at the cabin alone, he uses the aliens' transmutatron (which they carelessly left behind) to transform a group of animals into a human woman that he names "Animala". A hysterically funny dinner scene ensues as the aliens attempt to emulate human eating customs but unwittingly end up following Animala's feral habits instead. Eventually, the atmospherium is stolen, the lost skeleton is reanimated, the mutant shows up, and a distinctly bizarre wedding à la Bride of the Monster (1955) is inexplicably introduced into the story.

The skeleton actually has some of the best dialogue

Like I said, Blamire is obviously a huge 1950s b-movie fan, which is reflected in The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra. The aliens' costumes, the low-budget spaceship exterior, and the stilted dialogue would be familiar to anyone who has seen an Ed Wood movie, particularly Plan 9 from Outer Space (1959). For example, this deliberately humorous line from Lost Skeleton:

"Seriously, Betty, you know what this meteor could mean to science. If we find it, and it's real, it could mean a lot. It could mean actual advances in the field of science."

isn't a whole lot more awkward than this one from Plan 9:

"We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives. And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future."

While many references to the genre are recognizable to non-fans (e.g., an awful mutant costume that's still better than many costumes from the era, low quality models and sets, visible wires, the inevitable scene in which the monster walks off with the heroine), others are more subtle. For example, the fact that Dr. Armstrong is a 'scientist who studies science' is constantly emphasized (an unusual number of b-movie heroes were scientists who had an unrealistically broad knowledge of all fields of science). B-movie fans will immediately recognize that The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra was filmed on location at Bronson Canyon; a portion of Griffith Park in Los Angeles that became the setting for dozens of budget-strapped b-movies. And fans will also appreciate that the actor in the mutant suit is obviously struggling to carry Betty over the rough terrain (Ro-Man had the the very same problem in the exact same canyon in Robot Monster (1953)).

RAWWWR!

The only place where The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra stumbles is where it deviates from the b-movies that it emulates; its running time. Robot Monster was 66 minutes long, Bride of the Monster was 69 minutes long, and Plan 9 from Outer Space ran for an excruciating 79 minutes. At the time those films were made, audiences expected a feature film to last just over one hour. Although the makers of The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra intended for it to be an homage to '50s sci-fi movies, they made it 90 minutes long; i.e., closer to the length of a modern film. Although Lost Skeleton remains funny throughout, it starts to sputter around the one hour mark. The judicious removal of 20 or 25 minutes of material would not only have given Lost Skeleton a running time similar to those of the movies that inspired it, but also would have made it a slightly better film.
B+

A Proper Response to Bullying

2011-03-27T20:39:00.001-06:00

Like so many other nerds, I was a victim of bullying in junior high school. Only once did it come to blows, when the most dedicated of my tormenters cornered me on the playground and decided to actually take a swing at me. I guess the kid had made a big deal about what he intended to do because the anticipated fight attracted a sizable number of onlookers. He actually approached me and said "let's fight", to which I responded that I'd prefer not to since I would lose. Fortunately, when he finally hit me, it was a weak punch in the stomach during a moment in which I was breathing out (which thus failed to knock the wind out of me). I was so surprised at how well I took the hit that I actually started laughing at him. This humiliated him in front of the dozen or so observers and finally his friends pulled him away. This encounter didn't make me a hero, but it did mark the end of the worst of the harassment.

At no point was there any adult involvement. The playground was large, but the teachers never bothered to police the areas farther from the buildings. Of course I never told any teachers or aides about what was happening. Those ridiculous anti-bullying ads shown during kids' programming always instruct children to tell a teacher about it. What the ads don't show is that school punishments have no teeth, that an adult can't really take any action if he or she doesn't actually see any bullying going on, and that the bully is going to wait until you're outside of school to really let you have it because you told on him.

Forcefully introducing a bully to the pavement. Awesome.

I think every nerd, geek, or outcast has dreamed about finally getting back at the bully. The scene in Spider-man in which Peter Parker, newly endowed with his Spider-man powers, finally gives Flash Thompson a taste of his own medicine is the fantasy of every comic book reader ("comic book reader" is synonymous with "nerd", "geek", or "outcast"). Well, recently one long-suffering Australian kid named Casey Heynes finally had his Peter Parker moment. The video below contains footage of the bully's justly deserved fate as well as some hilarious commentary (and a spoof of A Christmas Story) by the very funny Steven Crowder.

The news reported that Casey had "been bullied all his school life". Given his size and the fact that he was strong enough to body slam the bully, I can only guess that Casey had been a victim because he had done what the school authorities wanted and had avoided responding with physical violence.

Like Crowder I find it ridiculous that the very school officials who failed to protect Casey are now condemning his act of self-defense. The boy had tried to resolve the problem peacefully, had been struck several times before he responded, and only used enough force to end the fight. He was cornered at the time so he couldn't have alerted the authorities (who would probably had done nothing) and, having been a victim for years, was probably aware that reporting the bully would have only made his life harder.

With the video evidence showing that Casey definitely didn't start the fight and that he tolerated quite a bit of abuse before he responded with force, I can only assume that the school officials are either irate bureaucrats who realize that they've potentially been exposed to lawsuits from the parents of either boy, or hopeless idealists (it's probably a little bit of both). The overly simplistic philosophy that "violence never solves anything" that is so common in schools is absurd on the face of it: violence obtained America's independence, ended the Nazi regime, stopped Saddam Hussein's butchery of the Iraqi people, ended the Fort Hood shooting, etc. And it the case of Casey Heynes, violence showed a bully that he can no longer abuse another person with impunity.

Nuclear Power and Relative Risk

2011-03-23T20:58:00.000-06:00

A commenter on one of my recent posts said that "Every human enterprise involves some risk". This is the same message as a March 14th Wall Street Journal opinion article. In light of the ongoing Fukushima crisis, I think it's instructive to review the concept of relative risk.

Just looking at the statistics, I think the most obvious lesson of the Tōhoku earthquake and the resultant tsunami (i.e., the disasters that caused the Fukushima accident) is that it's more dangerous to live by the beach than it is to live by a nuclear plant. The earthquake and the tsunami (which caused most of the casualties) left a death-toll of around 10,000 people, while the nuclear accident has not officially killed anybody (although two workers are missing who may have been killed in an explosion). Yet the lesson that so many anti-nuclear activists and ordinary Americans will take away from the disaster is not that beachfront property may be a poor investment, but that nuclear power is dangerous and bad. In fact, even in light of the 230,000+ deaths caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, I think most people would still like to own a home by the ocean.

Three Mile Island

I am always amazed by how risk-averse Americans are with regards to some things while having absolutely no trepidation about other things that are much more likely to kill or injure them. For example, nuclear power is one of those touchy subjects that causes panic or fear in millions of Americans. Yet the total number of Americans that have been demonstrably killed by nuclear power (not counting a handful of early incidents involving experimental bomb cores) is three. That's right; three people, all of whom were military personnel killed in the explosion of the experimental SL-1 reactor in 1961. One study suggests that one or two cancer deaths may have occurred after the Three Mile Island accident, but this number was determined statistically and cannot be confirmed. Worldwide there have only been 63 confirmed fatalities directly associated with nuclear power (this number omits weapons and military related incidents as well as the Fukushima crisis, which isn't quite finished yet).

Chernobyl

The Chernobyl disaster, which was caused by a poorly designed reactor and an ill-advised experiment that disabled essential safety systems, accounts for the bulk of the fatalities (53 out of the 63). However, it must be admitted that the official figure may be misleading since the Soviet Union was never known for releasing honest casualty figures. Shortly after the accident, the United Nations Scientific Committee of the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) estimated that 4,000 people would suffer from cancer due to the accident (later reports suggested that this was an overestimate). Not all of these 4,000 people would have died prematurely since some types of cancer associated with radiation exposure (e.g., thyroid cancer) are relatively treatable and have a decent survival rate.

To prove my point about relative risk, let's begin by approximating how many people may have been killed by nuclear power. Since I couldn't possibly guess how effective Soviet medicine was in the 1980s, we'll just count all 4,000 potential cancer cases caused by Chernobyl as fatalities. Thus, an upper limit of 4,063 people may have been killed by nuclear plant accidents since 1961, with the vast majority of that number being questionable. If we divide that number by 57 years (the number of years that have passed between now and 1954, when the first nuclear reactor to provide power for an electrical grid came online) we end up with an average number of approximately 71 deaths per year due to nuclear power plants. Remember, this number was boosted by an estimated number of cancer cases that might have been incurred by the Chernobyl disaster. If we only use confirmed numbers then the average number of deaths per year drops to about 1.

A lot more deadly than any nuclear reactor

Using the exaggerated number of 71 deaths per year, it becomes horribly ironic that most anti-nuclear activists protesting at a nuclear power plant must have driven there. Every year around 30,000 to 40,000 Americans are killed in auto accidents. It is estimated that a worldwide total of 1.2 million people are killed annually in auto accidents. This means that, on average, nearly 17,000 times more people die annually in car accidents than in nuclear plant accidents. Clearly we're in the middle of an automobile-spawned apocalypse. So where are the anti-automobile activists?

Electricity: Threat or menace?

How about an energy source that we interact with daily? In 1993 550 people were killed by electricity in the United States. Given that US electrical safety standards are significantly higher than they are in parts of the developing world, the number of electrical fatalities worldwide is undoubtedly much higher. Either way, this number is almost eight times higher than our average annual rate of nuclear power-related deaths (this assumes that 550 is a fairly representative fatality rate for more recent years). Honestly, how can we even allow electricity into our homes when it's clearly so dangerous?

Windmills of DEATH

While we're throwing numbers around, it turns out that accidents involving wind power have killed 73 people between 1975 and 2010. Note that this number of fatalities (which were incurred over a period of 35 years) exceeds the 63 officially confirmed deaths caused by nuclear plant accidents (after 57 years of commercial nuclear power). The most common cause of windmill related accidents was blade failure. When a turbine blade fails, the blade or pieces of the blade can be thrown at a lethal velocity. Now that wind turbines are being built in ever greater numbers and closer to inhabited areas, we can only expect the number of accidents to go up. Too bad all those activists are too busy protesting nuclear plants to care about the windmill farms being built near residential areas.

Don't breathe too deep

Now that we're back on the subject of electricity production, let's talk about coal-produced power. In 2006 coal plants generated about 49% of America's electricity and 68.7% of China's electricity (nuclear power accounts for about 20% of US electricity). Ironically, because coal contains a number of naturally radioactive isotopes, it is estimated that US coal burning in 1982 released 155 times more radioactivity into the air than the Three Mile Island accident. Ignoring the effect of radioactivity, we find reports suggesting that 750,000 Chinese die prematurely each year due to air pollution. The World Health Organization has claimed that 2.4 million die each year due to air pollution. Much of this pollution comes from burning coal for electricity. Now, I know that there are anti-coal plant activists, but many of them are the kind that conveniently forget that coal power is a major source of the energy used to make solar cells, manufacture wind turbines, or to charge their "environmentally friendly" Chevy Volts. Modern life (which is more than 20 years longer and healthier than life in the early 20th century) would not be possible without the electricity produced by burning coal.

The point I'm trying to make is that human life is full of risks but that many people seem to be confused about what risks they should worry about. Even if the Fukushima accident turns out as bad as the most extreme estimates suggest (estimates which are almost invariably developed by anti-nuclear organizations), the number of deaths that could be caused by radiation sickness and radiation-induced cancer would be far exceeded by the number of auto deaths that occur in the United States in a single month. Yet most of the Americans who are stocking up on iodine tablets probably don't think twice about getting into a car (and I'd bet a good percentage of them don't even bother to put on a seatbelt). Although I spend every work day in close proximity with nuclear materials and energy, I know that the most dangerous part of my day is the drive to and from work.

Going to the Symphony

2011-03-20T14:36:00.000-06:00

After about a week of blogging about nothing but Fukushima, I thought a brief change of topic might be appropriate.

Last night my wife and I went to the symphony thanks to a friend's generous gift of two tickets. The symphony played works by Brahms, Ravel, Sibelius, Beethoven, and Elgar. The night started out strong with Brahms' Academic Festival Overture. Since I'm not too much of a fan of the post-Romantic Period of music, I wasn't too excited by the Ravel piece, although the symphony and the solo pianist (a high school student!) performed it well. Since I seem to be some sort of Philistine, I had never actually heard of Elgar, although I enjoyed his Enigma Variations.

However, I was once again reminded of one of the main reasons why I prefer to avoid theaters; a surprising number of people actually pay to attend such events and then end up being rude and disruptive. Unfortunately, I have an obsessive compulsive personality, which means that I easily lose focus when there are extraneous noises and other distractions.

At least three couples nearby found it necessary to whisper throughout much of the performance. None of these people were children or youth who were dragged to the symphony against their will. All were adults, most of whom were older than my wife and I. When the music got louder their whispering got louder (which sometimes jumped into quiet talking). To those couples I'd like to say that I'm sorry that the orchestra was interrupting your conversation; perhaps you should shush them next time. All joking aside, there is absolutely no reason why patrons at the symphony should be holding any sort of conversation while the orchestra is playing. Nothing you have to say can possibly be more important than showing consideration for the people around you and for the artists who have put so much time and talent into their performances. Next time, stay home and put on a CD and let everyone else at the theater enjoy the music without having to hear the sound of your voice.

One gentleman apparently thought it was appropriate to surf the Net with his iPhone for most of the performance. How much thoughtlessness or contempt for the artists must you have to think that it's appropriate to attend a live event just to play with your fancy electronic toy? This is what children do, sir. If you're going to insist on playing with your overpriced device while listening to music, why don't you stay home, pop in some earphones, and listen to an mp3 on your iPhone instead?

Finally, why would you bring fussy infants or toddlers to the symphony? You're in a theater that's designed to readily transfer sound from one side to another; every whimper, cry, or scream from your children will reach every other patron in the room. This is a performance by a symphony orchestra, not a Disney movie or a children's concert. Do yourselves and everyone else a favor; hire a babysitter and leave the kids at home like we did.

Despite these distractions, I will still return to the theater if only because no CD or mp3 player can possibly compete with a live orchestra. I just hope that next time there will be less attendees who have no intention of giving the performers their undivided attention.

An Update on the Fukushima Situation

2011-03-19T01:20:00.000-06:00

Some of the following will make more sense if one has a basic understanding of the composition and construction of nuclear fuel. I provided a basic introduction to nuclear power in my last blog post and have created a standing page on the subject.

Fallout Over California
Previously I discussed the possibility of fallout from the Fukushima incident reaching the West Coast. Although I erred slightly when I said that the fallout "would probably be so widely dispersed that the radioactivity would be effectively undetectable" (I neglected the fact that radioactivity detection systems used to monitor nuclear weapons tests have become extremely effective), I was right when I also said that it "would have a negligible impact on public health". Recent reports indicate that the levels of contamination reaching the United States are "about a billion times beneath levels that would be health threatening".

Damage Control and Radiation Exposure

A damaged reactor building at
the Fukushima nuclear plant

In the meantime, nuclear plant workers (the heroic "Fukushima 50", although there are actually about 180 of them) have been attempting to stabilize the reactors. Working in shifts, these plant employees are being limited to 50 rem (0.5 Sv) total radiation exposure. This is ten times the annual Federal limit for radiation workers in the US but is about half the amount of exposure at which point the effects of acute radiation sickness can be felt; i.e., 100-200 rem (1-2 Sv). Although these workers will undoubtedly face an increased cancer risk in the future (perhaps four times greater than normal if they end up like Chernobyl's "Liquidators"), as long as they observe the 50 rem limit it is very unlikely that any of the Fukushima 50 will die from radiation sickness. In other words, the plant workers have been given a dangerous task, but it isn't a "suicide mission" as some in the media have called it.

Dry Cooling Pools
The latest reports also seem to indicate that some of the greatest problems being faced are not coming from the reactors themselves but from spent fuel cooling pools that may be going dry. If the fuel assemblies aren't being properly cooled they can become damaged due to decay heat. The zirconium cladding can bubble and burst open, releasing fission products into the air. Even worse, it is feared that the overheated zirconium alloys will begin to oxidize rapidly, which can result in a fire. In the presence of steam, the oxidation process can produce hydrogen gas. This process occurred earlier this week when hydrogen was created by the oxidation of the cladding of the overheated fuel assemblies inside the reactors. To reduce the likelihood of damage to the reactor vessels, operators vented the hydrogen out of the reactors and into the reactor buildings, which caused several explosions. The decision to vent the gas was definitely the right one since an explosion within the reactors would have been even more disastrous.

Given the potential consequences of allowing the cooling pools to dry out, plant workers have been desperately trying to refill them. However, in addition to cooling the fuel the water also provides radiation shielding. Without shielding, it is very difficult to approach the pools due to extremely high radiation levels.

An Introduction to Nuclear Power

2011-03-18T16:15:00.005-06:00

As I've discussed recently, a lot of information on nuclear power has been long on hype and short on accurate information. My own experience with friends and family has shown me that many otherwise intelligent people have little to no understanding of nuclear power. I recommend that people refer to Wikipedia for detailed explanations of how nuclear fission works or how a nuclear reactor uses fission to make power, since those subjects deserve a more in-depth treatment than I can given them in a blog post. However, the news coming out of Japan may make more sense if we briefly review what nuclear fuel is and how the fuel works.

A uranium fuel pellet

Most commercial reactors use enriched uranium in the form of pellets for their fuel. Uranium consists mostly of the isotope uranium-238 along with a small amount of other isotopes. When uranium is enriched to be used as nuclear fuel, the isotope uranium-235 is increased above the 0.7% found in natural uranium (most power plants use fuel that's 3% to 5% uranium-235). As shown in the photo, these pellets are relatively safe to handle before undergoing nuclear fission. The pellets are sealed into tubes (often called "cladding"), which are usually composed of a zirconium alloy. Zirconium is the material of choice due to certain favorable properties, not the least of which is its near-transparency to neutrons (neutrons will have to be able to pass from one tube to the other in order to sustain a fission reaction). These tubes are then bundled together into fuel assemblies. In a boiling water reactor (BWR), like those used at Fukushima, the assemblies are encased in an additional thin-walled tube. A removable control rod is inserted into the fuel assembly to absorb neutrons and prevent a premature fission reaction. In a pressurized water reactor (PWR) (the most common reactor type in the United States), the control rods enter the fuel assembly from above; in a BWR the control rods enter from below. Notice that all elements of the fuel, the cladding, and the control rods are made of solid materials. I am always surprised to find that many people believe that nuclear fuel is some sort of glowing liquid.

Nuclear fuel rod assemblies

The assemblies are inserted in a reactor vessel and the vessel is sealed. To start up the reactor, the control rods are withdrawn. Neutrons produced by the spontaneous fission of a relatively small number of uranium atoms strike other uranium atoms nearby, which causes still more fissions. A nuclear chain reaction (or "criticality") occurs when, on average, at least one neutron produced by each fission goes on to produce an additional fission. The control rods are partially inserted or removed as necessary to keep the reaction at the desired rate. The control rods contain materials like cadmium or boron that absorb neutrons and prevent an excessive rate of fission. Water within the reactor cools the fuel assemblies, slows the emitted neutrons (slower neutrons are more effective at producing a fission reaction in uranium), and is used in conjunction with steam turbines to produce electricity. In a BWR, the fission reaction boils the water within the reactor vessel. In a PWR, the water in the vessel is maintained at a pressure that prevents it from boiling; the heat from the water in the pressurized "primary loop" is transferred to water in the "secondary loop", which is allowed to boil.

Fuel assemblies in a nuclear reactor opened for servicing

The typical commercial reactor will operate for about 12 to 24 months before the fuel must be replaced. By this time, much of the uranium-235 within the assemblies has been changed into fission products (some of the most common being iodine-131, cesium-137, and strontium-90). Isotopes of plutonium will have also been produced when neutrons were absorbed by atoms of uranium-238. The reactor is shut down by fully inserting the control rods. At this point the reactor is "subcritical", meaning that, on average, each fission produces less than one additional fission. The fuel assemblies are then removed from the reactor and are placed in a water-filled pit or pool. Although the nuclear chain reaction has been stopped, the water is required to cool the assemblies since radioactive decay of the fission products produces a significant amount of heat. Eventually the rate of decay will fall sufficiently that the fuel assemblies can be removed from the pool and be placed in a dry cask.

Spent fuel assemblies in a cooling pool

I'll be explaining what the above means for Fukushima in a later post.

Obama's Surgeon General Makes Things Worse

2011-03-15T21:18:00.000-06:00

Let me start by saying that this whole Fukushima issue has me frustrated. An earthquake and tsunami kill tens of thousands of people and all the media can talk about are the problems that Japan is having with a handful of reactors. As serious as those problems are, to my knowledge no one has yet died or become seriously ill because of the partial meltdowns or the spread of radioactive contamination. The Wall Street Journal has a good article that discusses this unequal treatment. Also, I believe that America would greatly benefit from a greater exploitation of nuclear power. It is therefore immensely irritating to know that its opponents, with the aid of their useful idiots in the media, will use the Fukushima incident to further strangle the nuclear industry.

It's bad enough that the media seems to be deliberately conflating the nuclear accident with the tsunami's death toll (e.g., "Japan Digs for Thousands of Dead Amid Nuclear Crisis"), which appears to be an attempt to make unwary readers think that the accident at the power plant caused those deaths. And it sure hasn't helped that they've been distorting the science behind radiation and radioactivity. Now the ineptitude and ignorance of Obama's Surgeon General is actually making things worse.

In an example of panic and illogic that is typical for the Golden State, fears that a plume of radioactivity will cross the Pacific and rain down on California have resulted in a run on iodine tablets. Pharmacies are being inundated with requests for the chemical. I've even heard of some people in Idaho and other regions who are snatching up iodine at drugstores as well as buying it on the Internet.

As I mentioned in a previous post, tablets of stable iodine are taken by those who are exposed to fission products to saturate the thyroid and prevent the absorption of the radioactive isotope of iodine that is produced in a nuclear reactor. However, it won't protect a person from external gamma radiation or the ingestion of other fission products like radioactive strontium or cesium.

So, in the middle of a panic, when state and local officials are trying to calm down the citizens, what does Surgeon General Regina Benjamin say?

State and county officials spent much of Tuesday trying to keep people calm by saying that getting the pills wasn't necessary, but then the United States surgeon general supported the idea as a worthy "precaution."

[...] NBC Bay Area reporter Damian Trujillo asked [U.S. Surgeon General Regina Benjamin] about the run on tablets and Dr. Benjamin said although she wasn't aware of people stocking up, she did not think that would be an overreaction. She said it was right to be prepared.

Dr. Benjamin's response was utterly inappropriate and thoughtless. Instead of backing up Californian officials who correctly insist that such precautions are unnecessary, the Surgeon General has instead given support to baseless worries.

Californians' concerns are unwarranted for several reasons. First, the spread of contamination seems to be relatively limited. This is not like the Chernobyl accident in which the combination of an exploded reactor vessel and burning graphite blew huge amounts of contamination into the air and caused a measurable amount of radioactivity to spread across northern Europe. Even then, although towns near Chernobyl were made uninhabitable, the levels of contamination found in the rest of Europe were relatively harmless. In contrast, the Fukushima reactors are mostly intact and don't contain flammable materials inside their vessels. Second, Japan is over 5,000 miles from California. By the time contamination could reach the West Coast from Japan, the cloud would probably be so widely dispersed that the radioactivity would be effectively undetectable and would have a negligible impact on public health. Third, the radioactive isotope that the pills are designed to protect against (i.e., iodine-131) has a half-life of only 8 days. This means that within 8 days, half of the iodine reaching California would have transformed into a stable form of xenon gas. Since it can take 7 to 9 days for dust in Asia to cross the Pacific Ocean, by the time any contamination actually reached North America much of the iodine-131 would have changed into a harmless substance. The other major fission products, cesium-137 and strontium-90, have longer half-lives (30.2 and 28.9 years, respectively).

After the absurdities of the media, panicky Californians, and the U.S. Surgeon General this past week, I can honestly say that I've seen 1950s b-movies with a better understanding of nuclear energy.

Radioactivity Versus Radiation: Getting a Couple Things Straight

2011-03-13T22:58:00.001-06:00

Don't breathe too deep, guys

I've been closely following the troubles that Japan has been having with a couple reactors since the earthquake and subsequent tsunami struck the area. As usual, I'm amazed at the misconceptions that the news media continues to spread. I'm talking specifically about the difference between radioactivity and radiation.

Recently foxnews.com presented an article that said that "About 1,500 people had been scanned for radiation exposure". Another article suggested that iodine serves as a treatment against radiation exposure, stating that "virtually any increase in ambient radiation can raise long-term cancer rates, and authorities were planning to distribute iodine, which helps protect against thyroid cancer." Both these articles have confused radiation and radioactivity.

Given that the reactors shut down shortly after the earthquake, the radiation they're worried about is gamma radiation. Like visible light, gamma radiation is composed of photons, although they have a much higher energy than photons of light. Unless a person receives enough exposure to show signs of radiation sickness, there's no easy way to determine if someone has been exposed to radiation. That's why nuclear workers wear dosimeters, which measure how much radiation a person has received. Nor does gamma radiation make things radioactive. A person could receive a lethal dose of radiation and yet their body wouldn't emit any radiation itself. Nor would an inanimate object become radioactive after being exposed to high levels of gamma rays. Neutron radiation, on the other hand, can cause a substance to become radioactive (this is called "activation"), but such high levels of neutron radiation are only encountered during an active fission or fusion reaction.

With regard to the general public, which was kept too far from the plant to have received dangerous levels of radiation exposure, what Japanese authorities are worried about is radioactivity (this is often called "radioactive contamination" or simply "contamination"). Radioactivity consists of particles of matter that emit radiation. A good analogy of radioactivity is burning charcoal; the charcoal is the radioactivity and the heat given off is the radiation. Confusing radioactivity with radiation is like confusing hot coals with the heat being produced.

An actual anti-contamination suit

As of this blog post there have been two explosions at the nuclear plant. Under the right conditions, high levels of radiation inside the reactors can turn cooling water into gaseous oxygen and hydrogen. Apparently the Fukushima plant operators vented the gases from the reactors, which then exploded outside of the vessels (better outside the reactors than inside). Japanese authorities are worried that the combination of damaged fuel rods, gas venting, explosions, and potential breaches in the reactor vessels may have spread radioactivity in the region around the plant. People that are several miles away are relatively safe from the radiation being emitted by the damaged reactors, but they may fall victim to radioactive materials blown into the air by the explosions.

This radioactivity would consist of various fission products such as radioactive isotopes of cesium, strontium, and iodine. The 1,500 people mentioned in the foxnews.com article were being scanned for radioactivity (particles of fission products) on their clothing, skin, or inside their bodies. This contamination is detectable through the radiation emitted by the radioactive particles that are on the victims or inside them. Since strontium is chemically similar to calcium and is absorbed by the bones, and iodine is absorbed by the thyroid, these substances can spend a long time inside the human body. Long term internal exposure to radiation can cause serious health problems. The reason why Japanese authorities were planning on distributing iodine (the non-radioactive form, of course) is because it saturates the thyroid and prevents it from absorbing the radioactive version that may have contaminated the environment.

An "anti-radiation suit"
would look more like this

It's because of the media's and the general population's misunderstanding of the difference between radiation and radioactivity that I keep having to explain to people that there's no such thing as an "anti-radiation suit". The yellow anti-contamination suits (sometimes called "anti-Cs") that people may be familiar with are designed to protect the wearer from radioactivity. The yellow fabric is an impermeable material that prevents radioactivity from getting onto the wearer's skin. Where contamination may be found in the air, a respirator is worn to prevent inhalation of the material. These suits do not protect the wearer from external radiation. People in anti-Cs are as concerned about radiation as someone in street clothes. Radiation can only be shielded by dense materials like steel or lead or by generous layers of water or concrete. A steel or lead suit that could reduce radiation levels reaching the wearer by 90% would need to be several inches thick and would probably look like something from Iron Man.

Abusing Taxpayer Dollars

2011-03-08T20:43:00.001-07:00

Harry Reid to America: this
guy deserves your tax dollars

By now it should be obvious that the Democrats are not actually serious about cutting government spending. In a screed against the GOP's efforts to reduce the deficit, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev) lamented that those heartless Republicans would cut funding for a cowboy poetry festival:

The mean-spirited bill, H.R. 1 ... eliminates the National Endowment of the Humanities, National Endowment of the Arts. These programs create jobs. The National Endowment of the Humanities is the reason we have in northern Nevada every January a cowboy poetry festival. Had that program not been around, the tens of thousands of people who come there every year would not exist.

Can someone please tell me why the U.S. Federal Government a) thinks it has the right to spend our taxpayer dollars on a cowboy poetry festival and b) how any rational elected representative can possibly justify spending money on cowboy poetry when the nation is trillions of dollars in debt? Oops, I guess I shouldn't have assumed that Harry Reid is rational. That adjective couldn't possibly apply to anyone who thinks cutting government funding for talented cowboys is "mean-spirited" while dumping an unimaginable amount of debt on our posterity is perfectly acceptable. Obviously the reason why the nation is so far in debt is because our elected representatives think it's appropriate to spend taxpayers' money on cowboy poetry festivals! But the amount being used to support cowboy poetry is relatively small compared to the millions of dollars that taxpayers provide to Planned Parenthood.

The legacy of eugenicist Margaret
Sanger deserves your money, too

Planned Parenthood offers a variety of reproductive health services, one of which is abortion. In fact, their organization is the largest provider of abortions in the nation. Although Federal money can't legally be used for that purpose, some argue that it indirectly subsidizes abortion by freeing up their budget. Either way, taxpayers are being forced to support an organization whose practices are deeply offensive to a large number of Americans. And even if you ignore the political/moral issues, it turns out that the organization doesn't really need taxpayer support:

From 2002 to 2007, the national organization and its affiliates took in $388 million more than they spent on programs and services. No doubt the group lost some of that money in the same kinds of investments that disappointed the rest of us, but that has not prevented it from paying its president more than $337,000 in annual salary and tens of thousands more in benefits and allowances.

Of course, cutting government funds to Planned Parenthood will be even more viciously resisted than the elimination of taxpayer-subsidized cowboy poetry since the principle of abortion on-demand is one of the far Left's articles of faith.

I agree with the commentators of National Review: "If a sparkling new Tea Party Congress won’t cut off this bunch, what will it cut?"

Upcoming Comic Book Movies, Part II

2011-02-27T13:33:00.001-07:00

Last time I covered Thor, X-Men First Class, and Green Lantern. Of the following three films, one will be released this year and the other two will be released next year.

Captain America: The First Avenger (July 22, 2011)

Here's another superhero whose comics I haven't read. The character first appeared in 1941 as the subject of scientific experiments intended to produce a super-soldier. Captain America fought the Nazis using his enhanced abilities, his primary nemesis being the head of Germany's terrorist operations, the Red Skull. Although the character showed up in comics after World War II, comics in the '60s retconned the character, saying that the original Captain America was frozen in the North Atlantic in 1945 trying to thwart one villain's plan; subsequent Captains simply used his code name. The original was brought into the modern age when he was thawed by the superhero team known as the Avengers.

Prior Marvel movies have already made references to the upcoming Captain America movie or have hinted that it was going to be made. Like Thor, it was a foregone conclusion that Captain America would be made after Nick Fury's appearance at the end of Iron Man. After all, Captain America leads the Avengers in the comics. The villain in The Incredible Hulk (2008) was injected with a super-soldier serum that enhanced his strength, speed, and healing. This serum was presumably based on the one used to make Captain America. And Iron Man 2 implied that Tony Stark's father, Howard Stark, was involved with Captain America by showing a partially completed model of Captain America's shield in Stark's workshop.

Trailers and promotional materials show that Captain America will follow the original 1940s comics and will be set during World War II. Per the comics, the villain will be Red Skull. It has also been said that Howard Stark will appear in the film and will be responsible for producing the Captain's uniform out of advanced materials. Given that The Avengers is planned to be released in 2012, I'm assuming that Captain America will find himself frozen by the end of the film.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (February 17, 2012)

Although I collected a variety of comics when I was young, many of them focused on the darker characters like Ghost Rider. I owned quite a few reprints of the original series from the 1970s, when Johnny Blaze was the titular character, as well as issues from 1990s, which featured Danny Ketch as the hero. The 2007 film Ghost Rider mixed Johnny Blaze's backstory with several elements from the later series (particularly Danny Ketch's appearance and powers). Although I enjoyed the first movie, I thought that it was plagued by some silliness (no, this is not necessarily a required element of comic book films).

In 2012 Ghost Rider will be getting a sequel... kind of. Once again Nicholas Cage will be playing Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider, but interviews with Cage and the movie's producer suggest that Spirit of Vengeance may be somewhat of a reboot. Early plot summaries state that the movie will take place in Europe where a self-exiled Johnny Blaze is the only one who can save a boy named Danny (Ketch?) from being possessed by the Devil.

The Amazing Spider-Man (July 3, 2012)

It had long been assumed that the Spider-Man franchise directed by Sam Raimi would be continued with Spider-Man 4 and that a Spider-Man 5 and Spider-Man 6 would follow. However, in January 2010 it was announced that Spider-Man 4 would be canceled and that the series would be rebooted in 2012 with The Amazing Spider-Man.

The new movie will reintroduce the origin of Spider-Man and will focus on Peter Parker's experiences as a high school student trying to maintain his superhero alter ego. The Lizard is expected to be one of the villains as is Nels Van Adder as the "Proto-Goblin". Given the involvement of the creator of the Ultimate Spider-Man series (which was itself a reboot of the venerable Amazing Spider-Man), some have speculated that the film reboot will be based on the newer comic books.

Nerds such as myself may have noticed a few things from the early promotional images of The Amazing Spider-Man. First, the Spider-Man costume has been changed slightly from the comic books and the previous movies. Most noticeable is the fact that the gloves of the costume have blue palms and that the blue patches on the sleeves are more extensive. The images also show that Spider-Man will be using mechanical webshooters, as he did in the comics, rather than being able to produce webbing biologically, as was depicted in Raimi's films.

Upcoming Comic Book Movies, Part I

2011-02-26T15:13:00.002-07:00

I actively collected comic books between the ages of 10 and 12. At the time, the idea that I would be seeing those same comic books depicted on the big screen would have been laughable. Then, the only mainstream modern comic book movies were based on characters owned by DC Comics, specifically the Superman movies (1978-1987) and Tim Burton's Batman movies (1989-1992). Given the special effects available at the time, it was prohibitively expensive to film most comic books. However, with the CGI effects pioneered by movies like Terminator 2 (1991) and Jurassic Park (1993), the door was open for effectively any comic character. In 2000, Marvel Comics got into the big-budget superhero movie business with X-Men. A couple years later they followed up that success with Spider-Man (2002). Not to be left behind, DC Comics rebooted both their Batman and Superman franchises with Batman Begins (2005) and Superman Returns (2006), respectively. Some of these comic book-based films (e.g., X2: X-Men United (2003), Spider-Man 2 (2004), The Dark Knight (2008)) have not only been financially successful, but critically successful, as well.

Since then, comic book movies have become a major part of each movie season, with many of the most highly anticipated films being based on comic book superheroes. This year and the next are no exception, as a relatively large number of comic book-based films are scheduled for release in 2011 and 2012. The following are a few upcoming movies that I'm looking forward to:

Thor (May 6, 2011)

I've never read an issue of the Thor comic books, although I do know that the character is based on the Norse god of the same name. In addition to having the expected god-like resilience, Thor is given a variety of powers and abilities by his mystical hammer. The character is one of the primary members of the superhero team known as the Avengers.

With the introduction of Nick Fury and the Avengers program during the post-credit sequence of Iron Man, I knew it would be only a matter of time before they released movies of the other Avengers. This upcoming movie was explicitly foreshadowed by the post-credits scene in Iron Man 2 when S.H.I.E.L.D. agents find Thor's hammer in a crater. The film will focus on the character's exile to Earth due to his reckless actions and his discovery of what it takes to be a true hero. I was relatively indifferent to Thor until I saw the first full trailers. Now I'm looking forward to it.

X-Men: First Class (June 3, 2011)

By the time I started collecting comics, Uncanny X-Men was already more than twenty years old. The hundreds of issues built upon one another, making it nearly impossible for me to understand what was going on when I tried to start reading the series. Between years of prior stories and the additional series based on the X-Men that were eventually started (X-Men; a.k.a. X-Men: Legacy, Astonishing X-Men, X-Treme X-Men, X-Men: First Class, etc.), I don't know who could possibly keep all those storylines straight. Fortunately, the X-Men movies have simplified and compressed the overall plot into a manageable form.

Up until recently, fans had been expecting the release of X-Men Origins: Magneto. This would have served as a prequel treatment of the primary villain in the X-Men films. If that film had been successful, an additional film based on the comic book series X-Men: First Class was to be produced. However, it was decided instead to roll Magneto's story into First Class, which would be a prequel to the three X-Men movies (four if you count X-Men Origins: Wolverine).

As explained in X-Men, Magneto and Charles Xavier had once been friends and allies back when the team of mutants that would be known as the X-Men was being formed. First Class will take place during the Cuban Missile Crisis and will show, appropriately enough, the "first class" of mutant superheroes. Early synopses of the plot suggest that it will also show the split between Magneto and Xavier and the founding of Magneto's own group: the Brotherhood of Mutants.

Green Lantern (June 17, 2011)

With the exception of Superman and Batman, I was never really a fan of the DC Comics characters. However, I was familiar with some of the more famous characters like Wonder Woman, the Flash, and Green Lantern. Although I've never read an issue of Green Lantern, the trailer for the upcoming film is good enough that I'll give it a chance.

In the comics and in the movie, the Green Lantern is a member of the Green Lantern Corps; an intergalactic brotherhood of beings who are given superpowers by the use of special rings. They use these powers to protect peace and justice throughout the Universe. The movie follows a test pilot named Hal Jordan, who becomes the first human to possess a power ring.

Next time: super soldiers, demon-spawned heroes, and arachnids...

Granddad and the Skyraider

2011-02-25T09:00:00.177-07:00

I've already mentioned that I did some traveling this week. Well, last night I got back from California. I had made the unexpected trip due to the death of my granddad, whose memorial service was on Tuesday (it was only a few hours after that service that the PA unnecessarily panicked my wife). Between Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, we had known for a while that my granddad wouldn't last much longer, although he had already defied the doctors' predictions by several months.

I haven't called California home in over ten years (effectively my whole adult life), so I wasn't able to get to know my granddad as well as I would have liked. He wasn't a very talkative person, although he could tell the best stories when you asked him. Around the time I started to consider going into engineering, I found out that he was a member of the last generation of professionals that could call themselves engineers based on experience and on-the-job training rather than on a degree (I know plenty of people who hold engineering degrees that I would only reluctantly call "engineers"). My granddad had received much of his early training while serving in the U.S. Navy during the Korean War, where he repaired the electrical systems of AD Skyraiders on the USS Boxer (CVA-21). He eventually went on to become a highly respected "resident genius" at a company that specialized in chemical machining of aerospace and nautical components.

Although he was only in the Navy for a few years, it's his stories from that time that I most remember. My favorite story involved a Skyraider whose engine broke free when the plane crash-landed. The engine caught fire and hurtled down the deck, where my granddad found himself right in its path. He said that he "nonchalantly" headed towards a safety bunker just to find it full of pilots who were supposed to have gone below decks after landing. He crammed himself in and held the door closed while the engine passed just close enough for him to feel the heat from the fire.

Ever since I heard these stories, I've loved the Skyraider; an extremely successful medium attack aircraft. The plane saw service from the late 1940s to the early 1970s and was one of the last piston-engined combat aircraft. A few years ago I had the chance to see a flying AD-4N Skyraider and an A-1E Skyraider at an airshow put on by the Legacy Flight Museum in Rexburg, Idaho. The most memorable moment of the show was its finale in which the missing man formation was performed by the museum's three P-51 Mustangs and its AD-4N Skyraider. The Skyraider represented the missing man as it pulled out of formation. I'm going to guess that the AD-4N was used for that purpose since it was the odd airplane in a group consisting mostly of P-51s. Now that moment seems very appropriate to me personally.

Funny Webcomic

2011-02-24T20:30:00.003-07:00

While browsing the online comic strip xkcd, which calls itself "A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language" (basically a nerd's webcomic), I came across the following:

For those who don't get this comic, why are you reading this blog? I'm kidding, of course. I'm sure we all remember the climax of the original Star Wars when Luke Skywalker is flying his X-wing down the Death Star trench while being chased by Darth Vader. He's trying to fire proton torpedoes down a small exhaust port and is relying on his targeting computer to get the torpedoes in. Earlier, most of the Rebel pilots had expressed doubt that even a computer could hit such a small target. This was seemingly confirmed when Red Leader was able to reach the port and fire off his torpedoes, but they only impacted the surface.

While concentrating on his computer, Luke hears the voice of the recently deceased Obi-Wan Kenobi telling him to "let go". Luke turns off his computer (which elicits a panicked comment from the control station) and relies on the Force to guide the torpedoes in. The comic is suggesting a slightly different reason why Luke had to turn off his computer.

Snake Oil Redux

2011-02-23T21:11:00.002-07:00

I'd like to start by saying that we generally like our pediatricians' office. The doctors we've seen are amiable, good with kids, and competent. I doubt this little incident will cause us to change offices. However, after this recent event, I think we'll think twice before trusting the opinion of a certain PA (physician assistant).

Our youngest daughter, who recently turned three, has been suffering from the same flu that I had gotten just a few weeks ago. She seemed to get it about a day after Son of Atomic Spud did, but it hit her a lot harder. After a few days her cough and fever seemed to get a little better just before getting worse again. And for several days she had woken up repeatedly during the night and complained of headaches. These seemed to be worse at night and in the morning but got a little better during the day, although she would continue to complain about them occasionally. Of course, since she's only three she can't really describe what's wrong with her.

Now, with my recent experience with the flu and the following infection, I suspected that our daughter also had a secondary infection. So yesterday (Tuesday) my wife took our daughter to the pediatricians' office and saw the PA (the office was too busy for her to see a doctor). I was out of town at the time, as I mentioned in a previous post, and ended up getting a call from my very distraught wife. It seems that the utterly unthinking PA had actually said to my wife that the nighttime headaches concerned her because they can be a symptom of a brain tumor and that, had there not been signs of an ear infection (the probable cause of the headaches), she would have recommended that our daughter have a cranial CT scan. She further said that if the headaches didn't go away with antibiotics within a couple days that she should still have the scan. However, she gave the option of having the scan done as soon as possible.

Honestly, what in the world would possess this woman to actually say such a thing to a child's mother? What possible outcome other than panic could she have possibly expected? Why didn't she simply say "if the headaches aren't gone in a couple days, give us a call"? Why would she even utter aloud the absolute scariest thing a parent can hear, even if she did amend it with, 'but it's probably an infection'? Why would she make such a thoughtless and terrifying statement to a toddler's parent?

Since I've lived with headaches all my life, I've done more research on the topic than the average person. Thus, I know that nighttime headaches can have a variety of causes, the majority of headaches do not indicate a tumor, and headaches are usually not the first or only symptom of a brain tumor. Additionally, the probability that a tumor-related headache would start at exactly the same time as a flu and a secondary infection must be vanishingly remote. Several websites suggested that a sinus infection in toddlers might cause them to wake up with headaches because sinus pressure increases when one is lying down. Given our daughter's symptoms, why would "brain tumor" pop into the PA's head before "sinus infection"?

With the PA's statement about tumors outweighing her tepid assurances and my layman's understanding of the subject, we decided to have the scan done right away. We therefore accepted the PA's offer to make an appointment the very next morning. Today (Wednesday) found my wife sitting next to the phone all morning. At 11 AM, expecting to have heard something about the appointment by then, she called the doctors' office. The nurse apologized, saying that she had intended to make the appointment shortly after the office opened (8 AM), but that they'd been swamped and she hadn't made the call yet. I can't help but to emphasize this point: the PA at their office verbally expressed that one our daughter's symptoms is sometimes an indication of a brain tumor (and in so doing terrified the child's poor mother), offered to make a an appointment for a CT scan first thing the next morning, and then the nurse failed to make the five minute call because she was swamped with kids with fevers and sniffles. Did anyone at this office understand that an offhanded statement by a member of their staff drove their clients into a panic and now their apparent unwillingness to act with alacrity was making the situation worse?

Fortunately for our sanity, they were able to make a 3 PM appointment for our daughter. Apparently she became upset upon arriving in the radiology office because it was not the kid-friendly place she was used to, but a sweet grandmotherly woman helped to calm her down. They were able to do the scan right away and our little three year old held still enough for them to complete it in a single pass. My worry was that she would panic and squirm and they would have to expose her to X-rays again and again to get the images. I'm not afraid of the amount of radiation produced by a typical medical procedure, but I do respect it.

So in the end we irradiated our daughter's brain to eliminate the possibility that her headaches were caused by something serious. Approximately 150 millirem later (which is about 15 times as much radiation as I've received during the past five years working as an engineer in the nuclear industry) and hundreds of dollars later, we found that there is absolutely nothing wrong with her head. I'm still not sure if my relief outweighs my anger that our family was put through this ordeal. And I take an extremely dim view of people who make my wife cry.

Cell Phone Etiquette

2011-02-21T10:52:00.001-07:00

Long distance traveling always reminds me of why I avoid going out in public. Yesterday I spent about four hours in two airports and couldn't help but to think of the starship passengers in WALL-E. I noted the following during the time in which I was completely unable to concentrate on my Star Trek novel:

1) Out of dozens of people around me, I saw only five who actually had books with them. I was the only one trying to read mine. One person was reading a magazine while chatting with a friend.
2) Approximately 20% of all airline passengers were staring at their feature-overloaded phones. Many of those phones were beeping or otherwise making noise.
3) Approximately 10% of all airline passengers were talking on their cellphones.
4) All airline passengers talking on their cellphones were holding very loud (and inevitably inane) conversations.

And I do mean loud. I often carry my mp3 player with me, which is equipped with noise canceling earbuds. These earbuds are good enough that I can mow the lawn while wearing them and still listen to music at a volume only a couple notches above my usual setting (I usually keep it between 4 and 6 out of a maximum of 20). I shouldn't have been able to clearly hear the cellphone conversation of a person sitting ten feet away while I was wearing noise canceling earbuds.

I'm always looking for new ways to isolate myself from the world

Without fail, every time I got a few pages into my book someone would decide that they absolutely had to talk to someone about absolutely nothing at all. This made it practically impossible to read my book since I stopped being able to concentrate on reading in noisy environments while in college (apparently college brained my damage). The cellphone yakkers completely overpowered the earbuds.

So, as a public service the Atomic Spud would like to remind all loud cellphone talkers of the following:

Telephones transmit sound over long distances:
The point of a telephone is to allow people to talk to each other despite the fact that they are separated by a significant distance. Thanks to Alexander Graham Bell and the telephone, you don't need to yell to be heard far away.

Cellphone microphones have improved over the years:
The microphones on modern cellphones are designed to pick up and amplify the sender's voice while isolating it from the surrounding noise. I have found that I can be heard perfectly well while talking at a level just above a whisper and cupping my hand over my mouth and the microphone.

YOU ARE IN PUBLIC:
You're holding a conversation at a very high volume while sitting immediately next to perfect strangers. We may not be able to hear the other guy, but we can certainly hear you. Dozens of unwilling people you don't know are now privy to aspects of your life that you would never have shared with them directly.
To the gentleman in the Salt Lake City airport: I don't care that Walmart didn't have any snowshoes that fit you because you have hammer toes. To the woman with the heavy smoker's voice in Denver: I don't care what your girlfriends say about each other. To the teenagers at both airports: what you accuse your parents of thinking is true; nothing you have to say is important.

Have people always been this way or is this a new phenomenon? Honestly, if you want to broadcast your life to the whole world, post it on Facebook or a blog so the rest of us can choose whether we want to listen in or not.

Thank heavens they still don't allow people to talk on their cellphones during the flight.

The Mythbusters Go to Washington

2011-02-19T21:02:00.002-07:00

As I said earlier, I watch every episode of Mythbusters. But I didn't claim to do it in a timely manner. I DVR them and watch them in clusters months after their original air date. Today I finally watched the highly anticipated "President's Challenge" episode that aired on December 8, 2010.

Even at the White House Jamie wears the exact same outfit

I had misgivings when I first heard that President Obama was going to be on Mythbusters. I just don't care for him as our president. There's hardly a policy decision that Obama has made that I've agreed with, his political and social views are almost completely antithetical to mine, and he's driven away our allies while trying to appease our enemies. However, President Obama and the Mythbusters had enough class to leave all politics out of the show. Obama's appearance was as President of the United States rather than as politician Barack Obama.

Despite my personal opinions about the President, I think it's remarkable that in a few short years Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman, and the others behind Mythbusters have turned a show with such a goofy premise into an entertaining yet reasonably educational program that has earned such high-level attention. I had never before seen a non-fiction series that was able to capture the interest of kids, adults, blue-collar workers, engineers, U.S. presidents, etc.

I will have to take one political potshot; of all the things that Obama could have asked the Mythbusters to do, he asked them to revisit a myth that they've busted on two separate occasions. Obama asked the Mythbusters to attempt the Archimedes Solar Death Ray myth again. This historical myth claims that Greek genius Archimedes devised a weapon that used bronze shields to focus the sun's rays on invading Roman ships during the Siege of Syracuse (214-212 BC). Supposedly the ships started to catch fire, forcing the Romans to retreat. The Mythbusters had tested the myth in 2004, trying to set fire to a boat using a large circular array of mirrors. In 2006 they tried it again using an even larger array of mirrors. Although the ship did smolder, the legend was still deemed "busted" since the array was too large to keep focused on a moving ship and because weather conditions had to be just right for it to work. With the 2010 Presidential Challenge, the Mythbusters tested the myth again with 500 high school students focusing mirrors on the wooden boat's more flammable sail. Again they failed to confirm the legend.

So here's my partisan political jab: it seems appropriate that President Barack Obama would have the Mythbusters revisit a twice-busted myth. After all, Obama is the one who keeps trying to use Keynesian theories to fix America's economic problems. Like Archimedes' death ray, Keynesian economics have failed time and again, most notably during the Great Depression and the period of stagflation in the 1970s. The 2009 Stimulus act was simply one more in a long line failures attributable to Keynesian economic philosophy. Like the Mythbusters, Obama and other believers in Keynes' flawed ideas need to take to heart this bit of wisdom from W.C. Fields: "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. No use being a [dang] fool about it."

The Fall of Hyperion

2011-02-18T12:13:00.000-07:00

Given the complexity of Dan Simmons' Hyperion Cantos, the following review would probably make more sense after reading my review of Hyperion and my oddly popular post on the Shrike.

The first thing I noticed upon starting the book was that I disagree with several Amazon.com reviewers; Hyperion and The Fall of Hyperion shouldn't necessarily form a single book. My copy does indeed bind both books together, but it's been out of print for a long time.

Hyperion is told as a space opera version of Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. As I mentioned in my review of Hyperion, the first novel is composed of the pilgrims' stories of how they ended up on the Shrike pilgrimage. With each story the reader better understands the nature of the Hegemony and the mysterious creature known as the Shrike. Also revealed is the basic relationship that humanity has with the highly evolved artificial intelligences (AIs) that form the TechnoCore. Once slaves to humanity, the AIs of the Core declared independence centuries before the opening of Hyperion, declaring themselves as allies and friends to the Hegemony of Man instead. At least that's what the AIs claim. There are factions within the Core that see humanity as a parasite and a distraction from their goal of developing an Ultimate Intelligence; effectively a deus ex machina.

The first book ends on a cliffhanger, which is why some reviewers believe that the story shouldn't have been divided between two novels. However, The Fall of Hyperion is narrated very differently and has a broader focus than the preceding book. The viewpoint character is a "cybrid"; a being whose body is fully human but whose intelligence is an AI that is shared between its body and the Core. This particular cybrid, a replica of the 19th century poet John Keats, has the ability to dream events happening elsewhere. It is through these dreams that we find out what's happening to the pilgrims featured in the first novel.

Although the pilgrims' experiences continue to be an important part of the story, much of the novel's focus is on the organization of Hegemony itself, the conflict between the factions within the Core, and the invasion by the Ousters. Introduced in Hyperion, the Ousters are groups of humanity that chose to live between the stars because they refused to be dependent on the Core's technology. They particularly abhor the Core-controlled farcaster teleportation system that makes the Hegemony's WorldWeb possible.

Many of the mysteries and apparent contradictions introduced in the first novel are explained in this book. After the buildup that the Shrike received in Hyperion I had been certain that it would be impossible for Dan Simmons to reveal its origin and purpose without disappointing the reader. Not only was I not disappointed, but the truth behind the creature turned out to be even more interesting than I thought it could be. Even after we know what the Shrike is, the creature loses none of its menace.

The Fall of Hyperion is even more epic in its scope than Hyperion. The story is about nothing less than the destruction of worlds, the clash of gods, and the fate of humanity. Despite this, Simmons gives us a great cast of complex, believable characters. I love a story with a noble protagonist and Simmons' books gives us several. My favorite example of this occurs when one of the pilgrims, Colonel Kassad (who is equipped with a combat suit from humanity's far-future), is seriously injured while fighting the Shrike through time and space. However, when he finds the Shrike approaching two other pilgrims, he heads back into combat. Moneta, a woman from that same far-future, warns him about his decision:

"If you fight again," she said, her voice soft and urgent in his ear, "the Shrike will kill you."
"They're my friends," said Kassad. His FORCE gear and torn armor lay where Moneta had thrown it hours earlier. He searched the Monolith until he found his assault rifle and a bandolier of grenades, saw the rifle was still functional, checked charges and clicked off safeties, left the Monolith, and stepped forward at double time to intercept the Shrike.

I have a soft spot for characters who choose to face certain death because of loyalty and friendship.

Having now read two of Simmons' books, I'd like to comment on how much I like his prose. His writing is perfectly balanced between the bare-bones simplicity of an Orson Scott Card and the over-abundant descriptiveness of a Greg Bear. While I enjoy Card's writing, I feel that Bear's approach meanders too much from the plot and the characters. Although the worlds that Simmons has created, Hyperion's Valley of the Time Tombs, and the Shrike are all lovingly detailed, it's never to the point of distraction. Thanks to the grand scale of his stories and his writing style, I will definitely be seeking out more of Simmons' novels, especially the final two books of the Hyperion saga: Endymion and The Rise of Endymion.

A final word on my complaints about the first book. The Fall of Hyperion also contains some strong language and sexuality, although not nearly as much as in the first book. I'm glad that Simmons doesn't employ these elements gratuitously but rather as character traits or plot points that didn't often come into play in the second novel. Although I prefer that an author avoids such things altogether, it's worse when he or she distributes foul language or sex liberally throughout his or her writing, regardless of its relevance to the story.
A