Pluto - a new verb

I love learning new words! Therefore I signed up for the daily word from Urban Dictionary to increase my vocabulary. This also helps me to be hip in the office and maintain my title of the coolest aunt to my four nephews.

It is a pleasure to share this with you! In honour of Pluto, Urban Dictionary has come up with this:


pluto

Verb. to pluto someone or something is to downgrade, demote or remove altogether from a prestigious group or list, Like what was done to the planet of the same name.

Example: Harvey got plutoed from our blog

Agenda

Hard news, to hear of another school shooting. And once again, the shooter was not a berserker pushed suddenly over the edge to run amuck with bare hands or whatever weapon came to hand. Once again, the shooter took time to gather weapons and go to the school.

Fifteen times since 1975, someone has gone to a Canadian school with a gun and an agenda. And that's not even counting the time in 1977 when my high-school principal was knifed by a former student in the school parking lot. By the time the shooter begins to fire, there's usually not much anyone can to to avoid multiple injuries, death and suicide by cop. Usually the shooter is a student.

When it's an adult, he's not able to be steered from his crime, because of chronic mental illness and long-term distress. One Canadian school shooter was a husband unable to adjust to a divorce, another a professor who didn't get tenure. The male pronoun is used on purpose here, because almost all school shooters are male. Chronic mental illnesses take a while to fester, and are usually due to multiple causes.

But when the shooter is a student, the acuteness of his mental illness is usually a response to the student's experience at that very school. And from this fact, I draw some hope. If we improve the experience for most of the students (if never absolutely every one of them), we might make shooting up the school seem less possible.

We've already learned how to prepare schools for these emergencies once they do happen. General emergency preparedness helps cope with fire or earthquakes as well. At Dawson College, everybody reacted absolutely right. The students ducked and ran, helping each other escape. The teachers were alerted and instantly decided whether it was right to evacuate the room immediately, or lock the door and bunker down as well as possible.

The police have learned through experience that it's best not to wait for the SWAT team, but engage the shooter immediately; they drew his attention and fire. The nasty event came to an abrupt end about four minutes after the first shot was fired. The careful search for any possible accomplices was both necessary and thorough.

So, we've learned how to prepare schools for these emergencies. Now, what we need to do for our schools is how to help the students have better experiences at school. It may be one of the determining factors in making school shootings less likely. And if not, well, there is no excuse for any school tolerating bad socialization among its students. There is certainly no reason we should accept bad socialization as a major or minor factor contributing to school shootings.

Where mental illness is due to genetics or diet or personal trauma, it has to be treated on a one-by-one basis. But where frustration and lack of social connections and loneliness are factors, we can improve those for almost everyone. From an institution's zero tolerance policy on bullying to an individual's effort to smile and share pencils, we can each improve social interactions at schools. It may not have seemed worth insisting on, for the one-third of students who leave Canadian schools with lingering emotional scars, or the few who commit suicide (how many last year?) If we do it to reduce the chance of one in a million students coming to school with a gun and an agenda, we may not reduce school shootings to zero -- but we will definitely improve school experiences for many students.

“It can’t happen here!” students were heard to scream as they fled Dawson College. That denial is natural. But we have to learn to deny that these things can happen, not only where we are, but ever. Our instant, natural protest has to become the one that says this event just can’t happen at all, not just that this danger can’t happen to me.

Even in the Winter, Arctic Ice is Melting

Scientist are very worried because it appears that Arctic ice is melting even in the winter:

Ice core borings in Antarctica have produced a record of historic carbon dioxide concentrations over the last 600,000 years. The borings show that the levels of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, are at their highest ever because of the burning of fossil fuels, Mark Serreze, senior research scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo.
Serreze said he was surprised to see a new lake, or polynya, the size of Maryland, opening up in the sea ice north of the Beaufort Sea.
In 20 years of looking at sea ice, he has never seen anything like it.
"If you asked me five years ago if it was human activity (causing global warming) versus natural variability, I was a fence-sitter,'' Serreze said.
"The magnitude of the changes is starting to rise above the noise of natural variability. There is a continuing trend. What we see in the Arctic is part of a much larger picture. We hate to say, 'We told you so.' But we told you so.''

Montréal Shootings

It turns out that my great-nephew spent two hours holed up in a classroom in Dawson College yesterday while a nut was shooting up his school and his classmates. He's fine, physically anyway, and his girlfriend who also attends the college was off campus when the shooting began.
I tried to think of something profound to say about the nature of violence in our society but I've come up blank. We are violent; we are hunters, predators, meateaters. And some of us can't seem to get beyond that. But why should we when our leaders can't see beyond that, either? When the answer to every international crisis is to threaten force, to use force, to bomb innocents, to invade sovreign nations, to lock people away, to execute, to intimidate, to torture.
Perhaps violence is the nature of our society.

9/11 was when...?

According to this story, 30% of Americans don't know what year the 9/11 terrorist attacks occured (although 95% did know the month and date of the attacks....)

De-Criminalizing Bush

According to this story at Counterpunch, Bush et al are planning to enact legisaltion that will retroactively "protect" Bush from war crimes charges.

"Under the Nuremberg standard, Bush is definitely a war criminal. The US Supreme Court also exposed Bush to war crime charges under both the US War Crimes Act of 1996 and the Geneva Conventions when the Court ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld against the Bush administration's military tribunals and inhumane treatment of detainees.
"President Bush and his Attorney General agree that under existing laws and treaties Bush is a war criminal together with many members of his government. To make his war crimes legal after the fact, Bush has instructed the Justice (sic) Department to draft changes to the War Crimes Act and to US treaty obligations under the Geneva Conventions.
"One of Bush's changes would deny protection of the Geneva Conventions to anyone in any American court.
"Bush's other change would protect from prosecution any US government official or military personnel guilty of violating Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. Article 3 prohibits "at any time and in any place whatsoever outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment." As civil libertarian Nat Hentoff observes, this change would also undo Senator John McCain's amendment against torture.
"Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice says that Bush's changes 'immunize past crimes.'"

For Jono...

I can't remember the last time I saw Jono! I've been hanging with Bernie and Paula every Sunday with my man, John, doing the kayaking thing. I've seen Steph and Karl too. We haven't done a group event to include everyone. It is time.

Why am I thinking of Jono? Because I got this in my email today from the urban dictionary and I thought only Jono would fully appreciate this and truly understand the meaning...

BONUS BEER:

Beer which one "discovers" having not known that it was there.
Typically this occurs after a party or family gathering/event and may often
involve a secondary fridge or forgotten cooler. Discovery of said beer
is usually followed by feelings of joy and well being, similar to
finding unexpected money in a jacket one has not worn in some time.

Example:

I'll just clean out the fridge, haven't done that in a while... wait a
sec what's this? BONUS BEER! Righteous!

Fascism. It's the New Terrorism.

According to this CNN story, "President Bush in recent days has recast the global war on terror into a "war against Islamic fascism." Fascism, in fact, seems to be the new buzz word for Republicans in an election season dominated by an unpopular war in Iraq."
Rumsfeld is also using the word. Click here to see a video where he describes the rise of “a new type of fascism'’ and compared critics of the Bush administration’s war strategy to those who were Nazi appeasers in the 1930s.
Merriam-Webster Online describes fascism as:

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Sound like anyone we know?
Perhaps Rummy and Bush mean "fundamentalism," described by Merriam-Webster as:

1 a often capitalized : a movement in 20th century Protestantism emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teaching b : the beliefs of this movement c : adherence to such beliefs
2 : a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principles, ie islamic fundementalism

I can understand how Bush makes that mistake. He's Bush. D'uh.
But how can such a learned man as Rummy make that mistake? Then again, he might be confused. After all, he's a fascist surrounded by fundamentalist fascists.
So let's recap:

Osama Bin Laden: fundamentalist

Saddam Hussien (r): fascist.
Donald Rumsfeld (l): fascist.

Four Years Ago Today...

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors -- confrontations that will involve both the weapons he has today, and the ones he will continue to develop with his oil wealth."
-- Dick Cheney, August 26, 2002

Is it crow-eating time yet, Dick?

Pluto -- Scorpios former ruling planet

Ok it isn't science but astrology is fun! Be honest, we all take a peek at our horoscopes and some of us may even have had our unique birth charts done.

Each of the 12 zodiac signs is ruled by either a planet — except Earth isn't used — the sun or the moon. This means that two planets, Venus and Mercury, currently pull double duty: Venus rules both Taurus and Libra, while Mercury rules Gemini and Virgo.

Until the discovery of Pluto Aries and Scorpio were ruled by Mars, thus making three planets doing double duty at one time.

With the demise of Pluto being a planet the question is, whose ruling Scorpio now?? Scorpians should be protesting!!! Doesn't this muck up the daily horoscope?? What are astrologers doing?? I suppose Mars could pull double duty again. And if the whole planet definition is changing won't there be more planets and maybe enough to go around for all 12 signs??

Pluto, We Hardly Knew Ye

Looks like we were wrong all these years -- there are only eight planets in the solar system.
Earlier today, astromers voted on a definition of "planet" that demoted Pluto from a planet to a Kuiper Belt Object.

The decision establishes three main categories of objects in our solar system:

Planets: The eight worlds from Mercury to Neptune.
Dwarf Planets: Pluto and any other round object that "has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite."
Small Solar System Bodies: All other objects orbiting the Sun.
(By this definition, Pluto is now classified as a "dwarf planet," although "dwarf planets" will not be considered to be actual planets. But I digress.)

The new regulations define a planet as: "a celestial body that is in orbit around the sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a ... nearly round shape, and has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit." Pluto is automatically excluded from the definition because its orbit overlaps with Neptune's.
This definition is cumbersome and subjective. Clearly, Neptune is not a planet anymore either because if its orbit crosses Pluto's orbit, it hasn't cleared the neighbourhood around its own orbit.
What about other solar systems? Would both planets of a double planet pair (that is two planets that revolve around a point in space as they revolve around a star) not be considered planets because neither has "cleared out the neighbourhood." The other planet of the pair is still there. So even a double Jupiter-like gas giant pair would not qualify as planets?
The previous proposal that saved Pluto, and brought Ceres, Charon and 2003 UB313 into the planet club, worked. Yes, it had the potential to increase the number of planets in our solar system from nine to hundreds, but so what? Some argued that it was flawed because the status of some objects might change over time. For instance, one day our moon would qualify as a planet under the first proposal. Rather than a detriment, this aspect of the proposal demostrated something that we seem to have forgetten: that the universe is growing, expanding and ever changing.
And not as fixed and static as The Group of Eight supporters would have us believe.

Bush Admits It -- It's All About Oil

Finally, Bush reveals the truth. As quoted by this LA Times story (Finish What Job?), Bush finally admits that invading Iraq was not about weapons of mass destruction, removing Saddam, helping the Iraqi people, or bringing democracy to the Middle East. It was about oil.

"A failed Iraq would make America less secure," Bush said. "A failed Iraq in the heart of the Middle East will provide safe haven for terrorists and extremists. It will embolden those who are trying to thwart the ambitions of reformers. In this case, it would give the terrorists and extremists an additional tool besides safe haven, and that is revenues from oil sales."

Please note that Iraq was not a "safe haven (for) terrorists and extremists" until the United States invaded.
But I digress.

Can Bush Get Any Less Popular?

According to this CNN.com poll, Bush's popularity is in free-fall. Among the results:

Just 35 percent of 1,033 adults polled say they favor the war in Iraq; 61 percent say they oppose it -- the highest opposition noted in any CNN poll since the conflict began more than three years ago.
A bare majority (51 percent) say they see Bush as a strong leader, but on most other attributes he gets negative marks.
Most Americans (54 percent) don't consider him honest, most (54 percent) don't think he shares their values and most (58 percent) say he does not inspire confidence.

Iraqis Tougher than Nazis...?

This Ari Berman story in The Nation notes that the war in Iraq has lasted longer than American involvement against Germany in WWII.

Germany declared war on the US on December, 11, 1941, four days after Pearl Harbor. The US announced victory in Europe on May 8, 1945. That's one thousand, two hundred and forty-four days.
We've been in Iraq one thousand, two hundred and forty-seven days---and still the Administration has no exit strategy, no plan for victory and no clue what it is doing. In case you'd forgotten, George W. Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" aboard an aircraft carrier over three years ago.

Bunnies Gone Wild on Campus! (1)

Walking across campus between 7:00 and 8:00 this morning, I spotted (without effort) 74 little bits of unharvested protein. I think that equals an infestation.

BYOB -- and save 3 cents

I've learnt BYOB doesn't mean Bring Your Own Booze, it is a new term for those of us who are into recycling. It now means: Bring Your Own Bag! BYOB is also the name of a niffy company that makes bags, some with sayings such as: F*@k Plastic. This company will be at the Splurge event in Victoria on September 16 (evening event/$25 ticket) and September 17 (day event $5 ticket at the door 10am-4pm) together with other Vancouver and Victoria small fashion designers, jewellery designers and craft people.

BYOB means cutting down on plastic bags, and although not all grocery stores offer an incentive to not use plastic, Thrifty's does give you 3 cents off your grocery bill for bringing back and using their plastic bags, or if you BYOB for each bag. This last shopping trip I used two returned plastic bags for a total of 9 cents off my groceries. Doesn't seem much. Except consider I go shopping every two weeks, 52 weeks/year divide two equals 26 times I go shopping x 9 cents = $2.34. Ok, still not much that I'm really saving here. But....I found this on BYOB's site and I may not be saving in dollars but I'm making a difference.

Plastic Facts:
Every year, an estimated 171⁄2 billion plastic bags are given away by supermarkets. This is equivalent to over 290 bags for every person in the UK. 171⁄2 billion seconds ago it was the year 1449.
Buy products that are refillable. For example, the Body Shop provides refills in its containers or takes them back for recycling. The recycled plastic is used to make items like nailbrushes and combs
Think of ways of reducing the need for packaging. Don't add extra packaging yourself - a melon, a grapefruit or a bunch of bananas already has natural packaging - does it need to go in a plastic bag as well as your shopping bag, and does that already efficiently packaged dairy product or piece of meat really need another wrapper?
We produce and use 20 times more plastic today than we did 50 years ago!
-Source http://www.wasteonline.org.uk



Plastic bags start as crude oil, natural gas, or other petrochemical derivatives, which are transformed into chains of hydrogen and carbon molecules known as polymers or polymer resin. After being heated, shaped, and cooled, the plastic is ready to be flattened, sealed, punched, or printed on. North America and Western Europe account for nearly 80 percent of plastic bag use-though the bags are increasingly common in developing countries as well. Each year, Americans throw away some 100 billion polyethylene plastic bags. (Only 0.6 percent of plastic bags are recycled.) In January 2002, the South African government required manufacturers to make plastic bags more durable and more expensive to discourage their disposal-prompting a 90-percent reduction in use. Ireland instituted a 15¢-per-bag tax in March 2002, which led to a 95-percent reduction in use. In the early 1990s, the Ladakh Women's Alliance and other citizens groups led a successful campaign to ban plastic bags in that Indian province, where the first of May is now celebrated as "Plastic Ban Day." Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the Philippines, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom also have plans to ban or tax plastic bags. Supermarkets around the world are voluntarily encouraging shoppers to forgo plastic bags-or to bring their own bags-by offering a small per-bag refund or charging extra for plastic. Challenge: Try to go at least one week without accumulating any new plastic bags. If every shopper took just one less bag each month, this could eliminate the waste of hundreds of millions of bags each year. Compared with paper bags, producing plastic ones uses less energy and water and generates less air pollution and solid waste. Plastic bags also take up less space in a landfill. But many of these bags never make it to landfills; instead, they go airborne after they are discarded-getting caught in fences, trees, even the throats of birds, and clogging gutters, sewers, and waterways. To avoid these impacts, the best alternative is to carry and re-use your own durable cloth bags.
-Source http://www.worldwatch.org/pubs/goodstuff/plasticbags/

When 1 ton of plastic bags is reused or recycled, the energy equivalent of 11 barrels of oil are saved. Paper or Plastic? The energy and other environmental impacts embodied in a plastic grocery bag is somewhat less than in a paper grocery bag. But paper is easier to recycle, being accepted in most recycling programs. The recycling rate for plastic bags is very low. So, which is better for the environment? Neither! The fact is that the difference between paper and plastic RECYCLING is small compared with the REUSING bags.
-Source http://www.sierraclub.org/bags/

Greenland Glacier Melting Fast

This BBC report indicates that Greenland's ice sheet is melting three times faster than previously thought.
I'd take a second look at buying that ocean-front property you've always dreamed of if I were you.

Some Pictures Don't Need a Caption

The Rapture's Coming...

...and you can chart its approach on this website...

An X dealing with Ys

I'm a member of Generation X, the real Generation X (1958-1966), the one Douglas Coupland was writing about in his popular book, Generation X. Although the term was used to define anyone twentysomething, it was tagged onto those of us born at the end of the Baby Boom (1947-1957) who are well educated or well experienced in the work force but who have been unable to move up the corporate ladder, those of us who may have more than one degree but not the jobs to go with our education. Also refer to Boom, Bust & Echo, another book that defines us Generation Xers, or as an Generation Y, go google it! I did:

Coupland first wrote of Generation X in September, 1987 (Vancouver magazine, "Generation X", pp. 164-169, 194: see illustrations below), which was a precursor to the novel and slightly preceded the term "twentysomething". The main character Kevin, 25, is a Canadian "trailing edge" baby boomer who denies cohort affiliation with his older sister, 34, and friends, all boomers. Kevin and his cohorts are all over-educated, under-employed, and pay skyrocketing living expenses, which forces some to move back home to live with their parents (that is, boomerang). Unlike boomers, they were too young to march for peace (Vietnam protests ended with the draft in 1973 with protestors typically aged 16-25) and either were not born or were too young to recall Kennedy's assassination in 1963 (long term memory starting at age 5). Coupland referred to those born from 1958 to 1966 in Canada, or 1958 to 1964 in the United States. As the term Generation X later became somewhat interchangeable with "twentysomething", he later revised his notion of Generation X to include anyone considered as "twentysomething" in the years 1987 to 1991.

And I googled Generation X (1979-2002) too because my office is starting to hire more and more of this group. I'm trying to understand them, I'm having to supervise them and it is annoying at times! This is the generation who had their lives scheduled for them to the max. Some of them lack respect but want respect themselves. These are the kids who expect the corner office on Day1 of the job. These are the kids who will change jobs several times because of boredom. These are the kids who have never had life without email or technology. This is the generation of instant service. Some of them fire off emails to deal with problems cced to management because they don't like the direction a face to face conversation is taking. This is the generation that lacks social skills because they've had conversations mostly in chat rooms or via email.

Sigh...good thing management is made up of Baby Boomers who think Gen X is bad enough and dealing with Gen Y is worst.