Good evening, 919 Gang. We’re still celebrating the
eclipse.
CHUCK BOYD writes (from Charleston, S. Car.):
Yes, as L'il Orphan Annie sang, "The sun'll come out
tomorrow,"
Unfortunately, yesterday it got cloudy and stormy and I
lost all images of the sun about two minutes to Solar Totality. Bummer.
I stepped inside and watched the "money shot"
scene happening about 12 miles away on our barrier islands of Mount Pleasant
and the Isle of Palms, on TV. Coastal breezes blew all the clouds my way!
Until blanked out, I had enjoyed watching the crescent sun
that gradually mimicked the moon on our state flag before the rains came.
The sudden and complete brief afternoon darkness was
awesome and turned on all of my solar-powered yard and deck lights. My confused
indoor cat ambled off to take a cat nap.
Several members of my Photo Group were in the right places
nearby and posted some really nice photos, including a great Diamond Ring one.
I had planned to relax and just enjoy the experience and
not bother taking photos for a change. Fortunately, my group members really
came through.
NBC's Al Roker, and the guys from NASA who came to
Charleston, were extremely pleased too.
 |
| Chuck Boyd, left |
PRESTON TUREGANO
writes:
After Monday’s total solar eclipse in Salem, Ore., my
spouse, Bob, and I drove (from 5 and 6 a.m.) to Eugene, about 50 miles south.
We never thought that after the 10-to-11 a.m. eclipse that southbound I-5
traffic would be a problem because we had heard so many sun worshipers had come
down from the state of Washington, Canada and Portland, Ore. We thought
everyone would be driving north, so we had lunch immediately after the sun
show. Our drive on 5 south became a bumper-to-bumper crawl/nightmare. Not even
5 mph! And thousands of 18-wheelers and recreational vehicles, as well as just
cars. It took us 5.5 hours to get to Eugene, where we planned to visit with
former Union-Tribune film and classical music critics David Elliott and his
wife, Valerie Scher, respectively. They moved to Eugene in late 2013.
In the attached photo, they are pictured in the back yard
of their lovely, warm and inviting home and garden, in which Valerie lovingly
toils. We thanked them for their time, patience, concern and thoughtfulness
while waiting for us to arrive. Alas, as nightfall was nearing, we had to dash
off to Saginaw and Cottage Grove just a few miles south of Eugene, where Bob
lived for a year as a child in the early 1960s. After our whirlwind visit with
D&V, and to Saginaw, and the Grove, it took us about 2.5 hours to get back
to our north Portland hotel at around 10:30 p.m. We returned home in La Mesa
Tuesday afternoon. Pooped, but elated because of the eclipse, a rather poignant
reunion with two good friends and former co-workers, and glimpses of Bob’s
past.
P.S. We watched the eclipse from the Lancaster Mall in
Salem, Ore. Plenty of free parking and no obstacles.
 |
| Valerie Scher and David Elliott |
STEVE PROSINSKI
writes:
Sorry about blowing deadline, Jack. Spotty cell service, no
power, dog ate my notes, etc. My short report: 97% of totality leaves you
wanting, but the setting makes you feel better about it. We rented Sheep
Mountain Lookout in Wyoming's Bighorn Mountains. 9,600 feet. $50 a night. No
services. Great views. I experienced 100% in 1979 reporting on the solar
eclipse that raced across Montana into Canada. Now that was something.
------------------------------------------------
JIM OKERBLOM writes:
"...most
scientific research (scientifically speaking) is BS."
The ridiculous statement from the last 919 post is so
profound it is hard to put into words. It is evidence of the
anti-intellectualism pervading the country, one of our major problems.
-- First, the statement it is made without support.
The news items included refer to issues with
individual experiments,
not "scientific research," a much broader term.
-- Second, it is clueless about how
"scientific research" is conducted. The scientific research about
climate change is not based on a few experiments. It involves thousands of
experiments, studies and analyses made by scientists all over the world in
various disciplines. Experiments done poorly that can't be replicated fall
away. Those that can add to the overall picture that emerges. (Remember the
scientists who claimed they had solved the problem of "cold fusion"?
Within a week or two, their research was deemed faulty because no one could
replicate it.) Sometimes, scientific research involves placebos and is
double-blind to help avoid unintentional influences. When there is enough data
to draw conclusions, scientists attempt to make them. They are often challenged
by others who are skeptical or have differing conclusions. More research may
test proposed conclusions. Finally, a consensus emerges. In the case of climate
change, a consensus has emerged based on research that began more than 30
years ago! That is "scientific research," based on the scientific
method. Trivializing it based on a Google search for critical headlines about
experiments is nonsense.
Could a consensus change? It's possible, if enough
contradictory evidence emerges to challenge the consensus. But what should be
clear is that when it is made, a scientific consensus is the best conclusion at
the time made by some of the top minds in the world. That's what public policy
should be based on, not "stay skeptical' chanting from a gallery of know-nothings.
Nor should it be based on "outliers." During the race to find a cause
and cure for AIDS, there were some scientists who insisted HIV was not the
cause. Dr. Peter Duesberg, among other "HIV denialists," still makes
that claim. Some of them insist that the virus does not even exist,
despite the overwhelming scientific consensus that HIV causes AIDS. Should
public policy be based on HIV denialists? I think not. Nor should climate
change policy be based on climate change denialists.
-- Finally, the author's comment is oblivious to the fact
that everything he is using -- from the central processor in his computer, to
the pixels in the monitor, the cataract implants in his eyes and the material
used to make the soles of his shoes, originated with "scientific
research." Though not perfect, "scientific research," using the
scientific method, is nothing less than the foundation of human existence. It
has given us virtually every modern convenience we enjoy, from cell phones to
cancer treatments and spacecraft landing on Mars. That's not BS.
What bothers me most, though, is that broad statements like
the one above can be made these days without shame or fear of looking foolish.
And we are all the worse for it.
-------------------------------------------------------
JACK REBER
writes:
Phil McCracken was among the nicest people I met at the
U-T. He retired (I believe it was shortly before the merger), moved to the Mt.
Shasta area, became an English tutor and produced a book containing columns his
father (Floyd) had produced for the Union under the title: "Southwest
Corner Stories - 75 years of Memories."
Sometime back Anita Palmer offered a copy of that book to
our members, and Chuck Boyd grabbed it. Now Chuck is offering the book. If you
want it, email Chuck at boydsivu1@gmail.com
Here’s a photo of the book and another showing a column
Chuck wrote for the series. Note the Bible quotation.
P.O. Box 2239
Ramona, CA 92065
U.S.A.
