Death by Loneliness

Wow! What a day yesterday. First thing in the morning the news of Farrah Fawcett's death. Then, just hours later, the news goes chaotic. It starts out with Michael Jackson found not breathing. Just a few minutes later, the headline was Michael Jackson dead. Then a few more minutes pass and the headline turns into Multiple Reports about Michael Jackson. Finally, the news is confirmed and he is pronounced dead to the public.

The news is claiming full cardiac arrest. I believe that is very possible, but will ultimately come out that he was so addicted to drugs that he could hardly make coherent statements. This is sad, very sad. If fact, it would be a very literal re-enactment of Elvis Presley's demise. He, too, died alone, in a mansion, of a cardiac related cause, presumably brought on by:

"a strong belief that the primary cause of death was polypharmacy," with one report "indicating the detection of fourteen drugs in Elvis' system, ten in significant quantity."

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley.

So the King of Rock 'n Roll, who died at the ripe old age of 42 is now joined by the King of Pop, who died at tender age of 50. What a parallel. They had massive amounts of money, marital problems, drug addictions, strange behavior, and most importantly, lived the loneliest lives known to man.

How hard it must have been to not be able to go out into public and just take a walk. Or to go to McDonald's with a few friends to eat french fries and have a shake. To become a prisoner of your home, never to be alone. I can't imagine what that would be like! Still, this is what people aspire to. They want to be so famous that they can never be alone again. This has got to be a true psychological disorder, since it is almost a pathological need to be craved by people. It is the ultimate narcissism. Here are a few definitions:

Narcissism, as in excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one's physical appearance. noun (See egotism) definition:

• Psychology; extreme selfishness, with a grandiose view of one's own talents and a craving for admiration, as characterizing a personality type.
• Psychoanalysis; self-centeredness arising from failure to distinguish the self from external objects, either in very young babies or as a feature of mental disorder.

Wow, that nailed it.

Truly, Michael Jackson had an extreme interest in his appearance. Hence the "nose job" that he vehemently denied. And what about the glove, and the suits, and...and...and the list goes on.

Ultimately, his death, was of his own design. No matter what is said about him, or what accusations will be alleged, he died a lonely man! He will be missed. He can rest easy now that his pain has stopped. He doesn't have to be lonely any more.

Power Enough for Everyone

So I'm getting ready to look at my electric bill, which is to say, I am mentally preparing myself for the devastating shock that will come when I open my bill. It's around $250.00. Not bad. Hey, wait, "not bad" is good for this time of year, right? So, if it's good then why do I feel so bad?

Perhaps I need to take a closer look at this. I take the time and make the effort to use, wherever possible, Compact Fluorescent Lights, or CFLs, we use a toaster over when possible, we keep the house around 78 degrees during the day, and in general, turn off lights not in use. And still my bill is $250.00 with Salt River Project (SRP). Sure, I have a couple of computers that are continually in use and a laser printer that is almost 15 years old. But I find it hard to believe they are the culprits here. In fact, I believe I should be looking elsewhere for the reason.

Lets start with SRP, and the other power providers for Phoenix. For the average home owner, they get one of two choices, SRP or APS, depending, literally, on where they live in the Valley of the Sun. In fact, let me restate that, the home owner doesn't have a choice, but will end up with one of the almighty power companies. If you don't want an APS serviced home, you need to move.

Next, they each run countless commercials about how to "save" energy. They tout the use of CFLs and power conservation techniques. Well, here's a rub. They are all over the average Joe to save power, but big business is wasting it away. Back in the 80s, it was the practice of a business to turn the outside sign off when the business was closed. In fact, a lot of them were on timers so no one had to even think about it. Nowadays, you drive down the road at 2:00 AM and signs blaze away with no one in sight. Even worse, car dealerships have their entire parking lot illuminated all night. I realize they want to deter theft, but the problem is their lamps are might expensive to run, and they have a lot of them.

As if that were not enough, SRP has a program that people can voluntarily sign up for where they are punished, financially, for using electricity during the day. So people run their air conditioners all night as low as they can and then try not to use anything during the day. I guess that would work for some, but I don't see the value in it. In fact, I believe actions like these fly in the face of the standard Supply and Demand principles and are actually contrary to standard business practices. Confused are you? Well, it's simple really. Let me break it down for you. If I make a widget to sell to the public I would set a price that would include the cost of making, selling, and distributing the widget and then add enough to make a profit. So, if demand for my widget goes up, which is a good thing, I can do one of two things: 1) raise my price higher because I don't have that many widgets, or 2) I can increase my widget production to accommodate the demand and thereby keep my price steady and actually make larger profits. A great example of this is McDonalds. More people want more fast food so they build more stores and sell more food and make more profits.

So why doesn't SRP, and the other power companies, follow this model? Why aren't power companies building power generating stations to increase the amount of available electricity for its customers? See, what people are not getting is SRP, and the others, can continually go to the Arizona Corporation Commission and ask for increases each year and use the "demand is greater than our supply" argument and then they get it.

Here's an article I found that basically makes my point.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200805/ai_n25415863/?tag=content-inner;col1

Headline: TransCanada Signs Contract to Generate Arizona Power

And finally, a small excerpt.

TransCanada Corporation (TSX: TRP) (NYSE: TRP) (TransCanada) today announced that the Phoenix, Arizona-based utility Salt River Project (SRP) has signed a 20-year power purchase agreement to secure 100 per cent of the output from TransCanada's planned Coolidge Generating Station.

Here is a Canadian-based corporation that seems to think it is a great idea to build a power generating station in Arizona and make money from it. Why doesn't SRP build one? In fact, I don't believe an Arizona-based company has constructed a power generating station in decades. Why? Certainly they are making enough money from their increased rates each Summer. In fact, the average household's bill doubles during the months of May to September. Sure there is an increase in power needs, especially during the Summer, especially when using air conditioners, but why not accommodate that? And if that were not enough, SRP, and the like, BUY their electricity from other companies around the continent. Surely that has got to cost more then actually creating their own. It's not like outsourcing to India where they can get cheap labor. They are buying someone else's power, which the seller is selling for a profit, and then turning around and selling it for an additional profit. So, electricity could be cheaper just be eliminating the middle man. Shocking!

The State of Education in the Millennium

Headline: 17 bodies recovered near jet crash site

Link: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/07/20090607airfrance.html

This was so bad, and so short, that I'm actually posting the entire article.

RECIFE, Brazil - Brazilian military authorities say search boats scouring the Atlantic Ocean have now recovered 17 bodies of passengers on a doomed Air France flight that crashed a week ago.

Air Force Col. Henry Munhoz says four of the bodies were men and four were women. He did not immediately provide information about the gender of the other bodies. The flight was carrying 228 people when it crashed the night of May 31.

Munhoz also told reporters Sunday night that several structural parts of the Airbus 330 were recovered at the location from which Flight 447 sent a burst of messages saying it was having electrical problems and loss of cabin pressure.

Immediately, I have a problem with this article. Can you guess what it is? Why is it so important that we know the gender of those who died? Will this information better our lives? Will it enable us to determine what happened to the Flight 447? Will it lay to rest our fears for flying knowing that we could die at a moments notice? And finally, does it assist the friends and family members who have suffered a great loss at the hands of Air France's failure to provide the necessary maintenance to prevent this problem? Nope. Not at all.

It is superfluous information bordering on rhetorical!

It is sad that we live in the "Information Age" and all we can say is: "four of the bodies were men and four were women. He did not immediately provide information about the gender of the other bodies." We should be able to generate a long list of information from the moment a body is picked up. We have dental records, DNA, and a master list of the 228 people on-board. Surely they can tell us more that this.

Why can't we call it what it is?

Headline: Thai police: Carradine death may be accidental

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/05/20090605Carradine05-ON.html

First of all, let me say that this is a tragedy. I was a big fan of his work and especially enjoyed the "Kung Fu" series. I would also like to extend my condolences to his family and close friends. He will be missed.

Now onto the other part. I'm not sure why the "drive by media" as Rush Limbaugh likes to call them, insists on avoiding the stating of the obvious. Oh, but let an emergency situation flare up and the speculation and conjecture fly out of their mouths like vomit. I think the first paragraph gives us a clear picture.

BANGKOK - The body of American actor David Carradine, best known for the 1970s TV series "Kung Fu," was found in a hotel room closet with a rope tied to his neck and genitals, and his death may have been caused by accidental suffocation, Thai police said Friday.

A few years ago, the media would have just said it, and they said it often. Now it is taboo. So, I'll say it. He died of Autoerotic Asphyxiation. Here is what Wikipedia says http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_asphyxiation.

In some fatality cases, the body of the asphyxiophilic individual is discovered naked or with genitalia in hand, with pornographic magazines nearby, with dildos or other sex toys present, or with evidence of having orgasmed prior to death. Bodies found at the scene of an accidental death often show evidence of other paraphilic activities, such as fetishistic cross-dressing and masochism.

Sounds like it to me.

Healthcare for All, Service for None

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/04/20090604ObamaHealth04-ON.html

The first paragraph is our warning:

President Barack Obama says he's open to requiring all Americans to buy health insurance, as long as the plan provides a "hardship waiver" to exempt poor people from having to pay.

Many years ago, the insurance industry told lawmakers that if they would mandate seat belt usage, it would go a long way in reducing the already skyrocketing insurance rates. They did. It didn't! Now, with mandatory insurance, the insurance companies can charge any rate they want because it's MANDATORY.

Now, the federal government, or should I say, the Federal Socialists, have decided that in the interest of saving everyone, they want to make medical insurance mandatory. Worse yet, they want people to "buy into a government insurance plan.". Really? People don't like regular insurance companies. Do they really expect Americans to buy into a government-run insurance company. Why even Medicare, a government-run organization for health care, is having problems and losing money left and right. Now they want to nationalize it?

As I've said before, and I'll say it again:

Never, in the history of government, has anyone in government offices, under the direction of government officials, with the help of government entities, been able to effectively negotiate anything worthwhile!

Next, we'll have mandatory "volunteering" and mandatory "religion" and who knows what else. Hmmm, that appears to fly in the face of what our founding fathers wrote when they severed their ties with England, and the King, and the Church of England, and...and...and...oh, well, you get the picture (I HOPE!).

Holy Melted Icebergs Batman

I was kind of watching "ABC News Special: Earth 2100" last night while I working a few Sudoko puzzles and relaxing. Here is the TV Guide synopsis:

"An environmental road map to the 22nd century explores possible effects of climate change, population growth and resource depletion, as well as measures to forestall negative consequences of those effects."

As I half-heartedly watched, they talked about the rising sea levels and how man will not know how to live or something like that. Basically, how devastating it will be to have sea levels rise 20 or more feet. Ok, yes, it will be devastating, even catastrophic is sea levels rise 20 feet! But will they? here is what crossed my mind. Aside from the whole "melting Arctic ice" theories, I would like to offer a new theory. Quite possibly never before expressed. Right now, there are approximately 8 billion people on the Earth. Every single one of them requires water to survive. Isn't it just simple enough to explain that as more people are born, more water is needed to sustain life. Couldn't we just think of the polar ice caps as our water reserve? In fact, lets take this a little further. With more people, we need more food, so more cows...more water needed. Then there is the need for more food for the humans and the cows, so more grass and grains...so more water is needed.

I honestly believe that we are taking water out of the ground at a high rate of speed to sustain ourselves and our way of life. That, in turn, may increase the temperature of the crust because that "insulation" effect is now diminished. So, the direct response is a warmer crust that begins melting the ice caps. With the ice caps melting, that water must go somewhere. The "climatologists" would have us believe that our coastal areas are going to be submerged under 20 feet of water. I don't think so. I believe that water is going right back into the under water caverns through some form of ground filtration.

Lets look at a few "facts" as presented by "climatologists". They tend to use Iceland as their example. I'm sure you've heard the arguments: There is no more more ice on Iceland, or Iceland is on the forefront of global warming. Whatever. Here are a couple of pictures they use to suggest these arguments.

Before: http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/worldguide/html/image_620.html

After: http://www.intute.ac.uk/sciences/worldguide/html/image_622.html

Clearly, Iceland is not under water. And it was their ice that melted. Hawaii is not underwater. In fact, I haven't actually heard of any island or coastal region suffering more than a few inches of a rise, and I offer that liberally.

Now, check this out. I found this article that really messes with things. It's brief, but well stated.

http://icelandtalks.wordpress.com/2009/06/02/global-warming-not-true-in-iceland/

Now the glacier Dangjökull is getting bigger. The National Energy Authority of Iceland in partnership with the United States Geological Survey they are mapping out the glacier. It turns out that the glacier is getting bigger. Many reasons are believed to for this. The glacier is all under 1000 meters in height, and the weather system is a bit different from other parts of the country. Other glaciers in Iceland and in Europe have in fact shrunk a little. Could this be a change in climate or in the belief systems of the general public? Could this just be a normal phenomenon like the glaciers who shrink and grow all the time?

Can you believe it? First I reported that the "trend" was reversing after spiking in the 90's and now the glaciers are getting bigger. Wow! Didn't see that coming? Not! I especially love the part "could this just be a normal phenomenon like the glaciers who shrink and grow all the time?"

Even after all is said and done, and all the arguments and theories are posed, I still believe one thing: We, as responsible caretakers of this planet, as set forth in the Bible (see Genesis 1:28 KJV), should reduce, even eliminate, pollution. It's in OUR best interest!