Educational Hypocrisy

Recently the local school system announced they were replacing 150 out of 5,634 teachers at under performing schools.  What a blatant and bold face lie. They will be relocated to another school. Not fired! Since they were the reason cited for the underperformance why foist them off on students in another school.

Children learn on their own. A good teacher will mentor and enthuse a child allowing for a greatly enhanced learning experience. Children are naturally curious and desire to  learn.  A good teacher motivates the desire and directs the curiosity.  They are able to function with both  a group and an individual.

A bad teacher is little more than a baby sitter.  They are guardians of the instructional material. Their group level dynamic many times is a disincentive and may squelch motivation. They will normally function well on an individual basis; but, the desire and enthusiasm comes from the child.  Not the teacher's ability.

The 150 bad teachers represent 2.6% of the system's teachers. This is statistically accurate number on  a bell curve (http://www.robertniles.com/stats/stdev.shtml ) distribution of teacher performance. I'm sure the bell curve of the same 5, 634 based on ability would show a shift to the good teacher (over performer) side.   So why the accurate number on the performance curve?

Even good teachers get frustrated and resentful  when they watch their peers exert less effort for the same compensation. Since they do less, they have the time to promote themselves to superiors and will frequently get recognition for some activity, usually an uneducational endeavor.  Over time the frustration and resentfulness will adversely affect the job performance of all the other teachers even the best.

To truly improve overall system performance, these teachers should be fired not relocated.

Heartless Environmentalist

When you hear BP is cold, uncaring, heartless, or greedy are they not implying BP is only out for profit and doesn't care about the environment or its workers.  I do not know the attitude of the CEO and other executives. I do not know the compassion of the Board of Directors.  So we can only look at the facts in terms of profit, because regardless of their sympathies for the environment or employees welfare we know they want profit.

 

Every day that oil gushes uncontained to the surface of the water is a minimum loss of $21,000 of profit.  Gross income loss is at least $700,000/day. A deep water platform has a minimum crew cost of $200,000/day. That crew cost is continuing and not being offset by income.  Likewise cleanup cost exceeds the income from the skimming recovery operations.

 

Days before the accident a crew member noticed a problem. The section of piping was shut off and the product was rerouted. Redundancy is expensive but minimizes the chance of lost production.  The problem area was scheduled for maintenance. Before repairs could be made, the platform blew up. The cause is still not certain.

 

My questions in regards to BP's heart are: "What was ignored? What short cuts were taken? What risk was taken? Just to ensure greater profit!"

 

It doesn't make sense to me to label BP as heartless unless one of those questions can be answered.

 

The heartless isn't BP or other oil companies, but environmentalist who force these companies to work in high risk areas. Now these heartless environmentalist are dancing with glee that the high risk situation came to fruition.  Who do they blame as heartless? BP!

 

Just for the record. I have no fiscal interest in oil producing companies until today. I bought 20 shares of CLMT.

The BP oil spill vs Tourism

Although beaches do scrub and clean seawater they also are being used for recreational purposes. Hence the BP Oil spill has impacted tourism. But, wait!  There has been no discernable impact on the gulf coast motel business.  How can this be! Aren't the beaches closed because of the oil?

Except in rare instances the beaches are open. Advisory signs are out. They range from notice of "oil on beach" to providing tips on how to use the beach while avoiding the oil caused impacts. So people are using the beach.

In fact the beaches have become a destination point for people who rarely go to the beach. So why are they coming? They are curious and want to see firsthand this ecological disaster so prominent in the news. Or, they are concerned and want to volunteer to help clean up. Hence, the motels are maintaining a normal seasonal occupancy rate.  Even vendors of beach accessories (umbrellas, chairs, cabanas, etc) are doing brisk business.

The oil does stain the beaches. Hey oil is primarily carbon.  Carbon is black until heated and pressurized into a sparkling diamond.  For the most part the staining is an adhesion not an absorption.  Meaning it will decompose over time with exposure to the sun and rain. Some communities are gathering the stained sand for remediation to shorten decomposition time.

Beaches are another of God's features to clean up pollution. When stuff floating in the water is ignored by aquatic life it is discarded onto the beach. This gives the terrestrial animals an opportunity to exploit the stuff. If still ignored it dries out. The highly oxygenated beach air circulating through the porous sand  helps the stuff degrade.  So it will be with the oil.

Watt is not lumen

Bet you thought it was supposed to be a question: "What is a lumen?"  or perhaps: "What is not human?"

No it is a very clear and accurate statement. Lumen is derived from the Latin word for light. It is the amount or brightness of a light perceived by the human eye.  Since every eye is different the lumen measure is based on the average of an eye disease free person with 20/20 vision.

Yeah so, this is important because? The new mandated light bulbs may not carry a wattage measure but will carry a lumen measure. So I thought everyone should know what a lumen is.

So how does a lumen relate to watts.  It doesn't.  Watts is the amount of power used.  With incandescent bulbs the more watts  used the more light. But a florescent bulb giving off the same lumen may use only a third as much power. Every type of bulb is different.

Good news. If you want to replace an incandescent bulb with another type and get the same lumen effect, there is a ratio you can use: 16 lumens per watt. This ratio is only good for watts of incandescent bulbs. No, no, no, not lots of incandescent bulbs; watts.

If the incandescent bulb is under 25 watts the ratio is 8 lumens per watt.  So, happy shopping for your new mandated light bulbs.

By the way, the term watt was named for James Watt and his work on steam boats in the early 1800's before electricity was in use.  A watt is the power needed to move 2.2 pounds 3 feet in one second.  Now, convert that into lumen.  You can use anything as the object to be moved. When I consider this mandate I think of moving Bull ___t.

I hope this was illuminating.

BP Devastated seafood?

Devastated seafood?

 

The BP oil spill has had little impact on the seafood industry. The oil floats. It has no impact on those under water creatures we love to eat.

 

But, the news reports major problems. No! Actually the reports just sound like major problems are occurring.  There is no true reporting.

 

A report will say something like "Over 30% of the seafood beds are not viable." True. But they didn't say destroyed. The fishermen can't work when the oil is over the bed to be harvested, because the boat owner doesn't want to risk igniting the floating oil and burning his boat. When the oil floats past they harvest.

 

Another report goes "Only 75% of the gulf seafood fleet is still working. Not true. Actually 100% are working, only 75% are harvesting seafood. The other 25% of boat owners have hired themselves out to deploy booms to contain the oil for skimming operations. They don't need as big a crew as for harvesting, so the reports of some fishermen are not working are true.  A boat owner's profit margin is higher when deploying booms. My guess would be the laid off fishermen are poor employees or the owners still harvesting would use them on second shift to avoid overtime.

 

About 40% of all seafood consumed in U.S. comes from the gulf.  There are no shortages. Why? Because the boats still harvesting are working extra hours to keep up with demand.  Middlemen grocers are pushing other sources because the profit margin is higher. A restaurateur may raise prices because they can blame it on the spill when their delivery price is actually unchanged. Capitalism! Don't you love it

BP gulf spill is an inconvenience

The BP gulf oil spill is not an environmental disaster. Inconvenience? Yes! But, not a disaster. These precious wetlands being destroyed are essentially monolithic  habitats.  Meaning nearly all the vegetation is of one species.  They will average 500 feet in depth from the shore. The oil may impact up to 25 feet of that depth.  Or, about 5% of the area. The impact duration is one growing cycle. A growing cycle being the time and energy to produce a new leaf.

When oil impacts vegetation it gets on the plant leaf.  The plant does not absorb the oil. The sun hits the oil and bio-degrades the oil. This may burn the leaf under the oil. Should the entire leaf burn, it will die. When it dies it degrades making it a better attracter for oil to attach upon. The degrades the oil and no additional harm is done to the plant.

The plant damage only occurs to the leafy material above the water. The stupid plant doesn't know it has been "disastered" and begins replacing the leafy material that was lost. Plants do this when mowed, trimmed, or grazed on by animals.

Yep, big catastrophic disaster.  God designed these wetlands to function in this manner. Jimmy Carter in 1977 issued an Executive Order to protect wetlands because of several reasons, one of which was pollution reduction. The wetlands as designed by God work well. Surprised?

Why do you not know this from news? Because our renowned Environmentalist have a political agenda, not an environmental agenda. It doesn't generate money to say, "Look how effective those wetlands we saved work ."

Wildlife Impacts in Gulf

BP detours wildlife cycle

The BP gulf spill is a detour in wildlife life cycles not a road block. I'm sure by now you have seen or heard about oil covered pelicans or other wildlife.  Yes, it tough on those caught by the oil. But, hey it is an example of survival of the fittest. That oil covered pelican can fly so why did he land in the oil? He was stupid. One dumb pelican removed from the pelican gene pool.  Had he not been rescued he would have died a natural death as a meal for a shark, barracuda, or alligator. If the pelican was stupid enough to land in oil those predators would probably have gotten him any way.

Worried about the gastric system of the predators? Don't. Oil is a molecule composed of 5 to 19 carbon atoms. The pelican's molecules are 20+ carbon atoms.  Yes, I know there are other elements attached to those molecules, but remember oil has always been classified as "fossil fuel."  When that predator consumes the oil covered pelican, is not much different from the deep fried chicken you have eaten. The difference in crude oil and cooking oil is not a difference in atoms, but in chemical bonding.  

God designed species to reproduce at rates to maintain a healthy community for the species' environmental niche. Why do chickens keep laying eggs? Because the community is not growing since the eggs are being consumed. So it is with pelicans, if a larger percentage are lost this year, each succeeding breeding season there will be more hatchlings until the community order is re-established.

---

Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how.