3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

3rd From Sol

Category Archives: Public Image

The Day Business Killed The NASA Space Program

28 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Government, History, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, Technology, US History, US Space Program

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

aerodynamic forces, astronauts, Challenger, Disaster, Ethics, International Space Station, Kennedy Space Center, launch delays, manned space program, manned spacecraft, Morton Thiokol, NASA, Solid Rocket Boosters, space exploration, space flight, Space Program, Space Shuttle, SRB, STS-51-L, Vintage Space

Thirty-two years ago today, the first in-flight deaths of NASA astronauts tragically occurred after a launch that wasn’t supposed to happen. Some have proposed that the accident was a result of NASA and their contractors being pressured for public relations reasons. The truth is that their deaths were caused by trying to make space a business venture.

Seven astronauts killed in the Challenger accident

STS-51-L crew: (front row) Michael J. Smith, Dick Scobee, Ronald McNair; (back row) Ellison Onizuka, Christa McAuliffe, Gregory Jarvis, Judith Resnik.

 Death By Impact

On 28 January 1986, seven astronauts in the Space Shuttle Challenger (STS-51-L) died as their crew compartment slammed into the Atlantic Ocean after falling 12 miles in two and a half minutes. They were not killed in the breakup of the Shuttle, nor did they become unconscious from the depressurization of the crew compartment, as suggested by NASA. Some, if not all astronauts, were aware that they were about to die and knew there was nothing they could do to avoid it.

Trail of Causes

The technical primary cause of the accident was weather-related. The Space Shuttle was not to be launched at temperatures below 4° C (39° F) and had never been launch at temperatures below 12° C (54° F.) A few hours before the launch the temperature had fallen to -8° C (18° F.)

The technical fault caused by the weather were rubber O-rings at each of the joints of the solid rocket boosters (SRB.) The O-rings needed to be warm enough to expand to seal the joint to avoid burning gases from blowing out between the sections of the solid rocket booster. The concern was that the power of the burning fuel would rupture the joint at launch and cause an uncontrolled blast of hot gases to escape causing an explosion on the launch pad.

Known Problem to NASA

After previous Space Shuttle launches some of the recovered solid rocket boosters had shown ‘blow-by’ of the O-rings. That meant that the O-rings had not completely sealed the SRB joint and could have potentially compromised the safety of the crew had the blow-by breached to the exterior of the joint.

Engineers at Morton Thiokol, the Utah contractor that designed and built the solid rocket booster, had felt that NASA was ignoring their concerns about the issues regarding the SRB joints. In an emergency teleconference meeting held the night before the launch, the engineers made it clear that the temperatures were unacceptable.

NASA decision-makers did not like the ‘no-launch’ answer and suggested that if they didn’t launch the next day, the company would be blamed for the delay. Morton Thiokol managers caved into NASA and overruled their own engineers. They gave a go for launch. Just prior to the reversal of the recommendation the general manager of Morton Thiokol said to the Vice President of Engineering, “…take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat…” It was the moment that sealed the fate of the seven Challenger astronauts.

Run NASA Like a Business

Previous space projects at NASA had been focused on spaceflight. The goal of NASA and its contractors were to safely put humans in space.

That changed after we reached the Moon. We had done the impossible and now space was less interesting and too expensive. The deflation of post-Moon public support forced NASA to find a justifiable reason to move forward. The decision was that NASA must end the exploration of space and build the ‘business’ of space. The Space Shuttle was intended to make the United States leaders in space commerce.

The Space Shuttle was built to be a reusable, frequent-launch spacecraft that would make traditional, single-use rockets too expensive and unreliable for commercial customers to use. The idea of running NASA like a business became the core value of the organization.

Delays, Delays, Delays

By January of 1986, NASA far behind its business goals. It was not launching the Shuttle frequently enough, nor was the reusability function creating the desired savings. STS-51-L was a critical point in making NASA run like a business. Delays in the launch of previous Shuttle (STS-61-C) had pushed back the STS-51-L flight twice. The launch had been pushed back four more times because of weather and equipment malfunctions.

On the Business Stage

Business is like theatre. It doesn’t matter what is going on backstage because the only thing that counts is what the audience can see. Backstage, NASA was in crisis, but if they could launch STS-51-L, they could maintain the perception that they had everything under control.

There were several public image opportunities if the launch occurred on the 28th that would be lost if it was delayed again. For Challenger and NASA, the teleconference on January 27th had only one possible business outcome. It must be launched. The engineers at Morton Thiokol didn’t know that they were up against a business mentality when they met on that night. Nor did the managers at Morton Thiokol or NASA know that they were about to kill seven astronauts. To them, it was just business-as-usual.

Events in Motion

Once the decision was made to launch events were set in motion.

  1. The cold temperatures caused the O-rings to become rigid. After the SRB’s were ignited a puff of hot gases blew through the O-rings at a point near the large external fuel tank.
  2. The joint temporarily sealed itself off from the debris of the exhaust of the burning fuel.
  3. As the Shuttle rose after launch it hit the worst wind shear ever experienced by a Shuttle and the debris sealing the O-ring broke free allowing the hot gases to burn through the joint.
  4. The flame from the joint acted as a blowtorch cutting into the external fuel tank and finally igniting the hydrogen fuel.
  5. The resulting hydrogen fuel explosion ripped the External Tank into pieces, pushing the Shuttle away.
  6. The Shuttle rolled out of its nose-forward position and was blown apart by aerodynamic forces.
  7. The crew compartment broke free of the Shuttle and continued to ascend until it lost momentum and began to fall down toward the ocean. It did not suddenly depressurize, but likely, depressurized slowly. The astronauts were jolted by the breakup, but not severely injured.
  8. At least three of the astronauts turned on personal oxygen after as the crew compartment fell. One did not, and the equipment for the other three astronauts was not found.
  9. The crew compartment fell and eventually hit the ocean, killing the seven astronauts on contact.
  10. NASA created a story that the astronauts were killed instantly, even after they knew that the events during the accident did not support the story. 

End of the NASA Manned Space Program

The Space Shuttle didn’t fly again for almost three years. It would resume flight for an additional 13 years, but it failed to meet the objectives of making space a business venture. The accident exposed the inherent issues of running a space program like a business and political pressure undermined the concept of a manned space program.

In 2011, NASA ended the United States manned space program with the last launch of the Space Shuttle. Since the last Shuttle launch, NASA has worked hard at pretending to have a manned space program by paying Russia to send U.S. astronauts to the International Space Station and producing videos of the development of the next generation of manned spacecraft. The reality is that NASA no longer can put a human in space, at won’t at any time in the near future.

Below is Vintage Space’s take on the cause of the Challenger disaster.

Why the Stock Market is Like a Strip Club

24 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

dancers, girls, invest, investments, men, portfolio, stock market, strip clubs, Women

People and Donald Trump use the stock market as proof that the economy is great. The problem is that the stock market is to our economy as a strip club is to love relationships.

Nothing To Do With Money or Love

A strip club is a place where white men give money to the girl that pleases them the most. It has nothing to do with love. Similarly, the stock market is where hardcore investors give money to the investment that pleases them the most. It has nothing to do with the economy.

In both a strip club and the stock market, customers are looking for the girl (investment) will put out more for them. The man or investor doesn’t care about the larger picture. He is after a short-term gain. In fact, like the guy who goes after the ‘bad’ girl, the investor can bet against an investment and still get what he wants.

Stock Market and Strip Club Feel the Pain

It’s not rocket science to understand that a booming stock market has no connection to the economy…unless….unless the economy crashes. When the economy goes south the wealthy investor discovers that investments are fickle. This is similar to the man who’s real relationship crashes and he discovers that even the girl in the strip club is not going to replace the one he loved.

When you hear a man or Donald Trump talk about how great the stock market is doing, remember he is like the guy talking about how great the girls at the strip club are, and understand he is talking about what’s in his pants, not what is real to the rest of us.

The lesson? Stock markets and strip clubs are for jerks with too much money.

The video below applies somehow…not to strip clubs, but to pompous men who like to tell us how great they are…you know…stable geniuses…

SpaceX Falcon Heavy-Lift Rocket: A Soviet-Style Disaster?

23 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Government, History, Management Practices, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Space, SpaceX, Technology, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Apollo, Apollo 6, booster stage, engines, Falcon Heavy, first stage, J-1 engine, J-2 engine, launch, Moon rocket, N1, NASA, pogo oscillations, rocket engines, rocket explosion, Saturn V, second stage, Soviet space program, Space, SpaceX, third stage, vibrations

SpaceX is maybe, almost, someday, hopefully going to launch the Falcon Heavy rocket that SpaceX circus master Elon Musk expects to blow up shortly after launch. His concern is legitimate as SpaceX’s 27 engine-utilization is reminiscent of the Soviet’s disastrous failure of heavy-lift rockets of the early 1970’s that used 30 engines.

I hope it makes it far enough away from the pad that it does not cause pad damage. I would consider even that a win, to be honest.

Elon Musk

Three 1st Stage Heavy Rocket Engine Configurations: top – SpaceX Falcon Heavy, lower left – Soviet N1, lower right – NASA’s Saturn V

Soviet Heavy-Lift Plan: Lots of Engines

To get to the Moon the Soviet rocket engineers decided to use thirty engines on the first stage of their N1 rocket design. Smaller engines are easier to build and operate, but more engines mean more potential for failure.

A rocket engine is an effort to contain and control a continuous stream of explosive force. The power, heat, and stress of a rocket engine is unlike almost any other human-created machine. It is a complex network of plumbing, pumps, valves, and structure that must operate perfectly in synch. If they don’t it usually ends badly.

The Soviet’s N1 rocket design avoided the need of designing massive engines, like their counterparts in the United States, however, they didn’t anticipate the complexities of all engines operating in concert. The result was four failures in four launch attempts and the cancellation of the Soviet Moon program. One failure happened at the launch pad with the power of a small nuclear bomb. 

Killer Vibrations

Even if every engine works to perfection, the vibrations caused by each engine can literally shake a rocket to pieces. NASA engineers learned early in the space program that vibrations between the engines and the aerodynamic stresses on the rocket created a ‘pogo‘ vibration running up and down the length of the rocket.

They thought they understood the issue until Apollo Six partially failed because of pogo vibration issue. During the ascent phase of the launch, vibrations damaged fuel lines on the second and third stages. The damage caused the rocket’s second stage to shut down two of the five engines prematurely, and the third stage engine failed to ignite.

Saturn V’s Five Heavy-Lift Engines

Despite the issues with pogo oscillations, NASA’s five Rocketdyne F-1 engines on the Saturn V Moon rocket resulted in 13 out of 13 successful first stage launches. The only partial failure came on Apollo 6 after the first stage had completed its boost of the second and third stages.

It is unclear why the successful Apollo program engine configuration has been rejected as an option for contemporary heavy-lift rockets. It is probable that private ventures into space operations, like SpaceX, want to save money by designing only one rocket engine for all uses.

SpaceX 2017 Great, 2018?

SpaceX is coming off a spectacular year. Of 18 launch attempts, SpaceX had 18 successful launches. SpaceX also had a perfect relanding record in 2017 for every attempt.

2018 is not starting out as well. SpaceX has only had one launch so far this year and it is rumored that the payload did not make it into orbit. No public information has been made about the success of the launch because it was a highly valued, super-secret satellite. It is so secret that the public has not even been told who the satellite was built for, or its general purpose.

SpaceX has proclaimed that its launch vehicle did everything it was designed to do, but the launch narration indicates that there might have been an issue when the fairing or cover around the satellite was supposed to deploy. The launch narrator paused for ninety seconds after he said the fairing would deploy “any second now.” When he began talking again he changed the subject. A few seconds later he finally confirmed the fairing had deployed but did not explain the delay in deployment.

SpaceX Falcon Heavy Engine Roulette

So far, the Falcon Heavy rocket is not a bright spot in the SpaceX story. Its first launch was planned for 2013, and for multiple reasons, it has been delayed for five years. It had been rescheduled for launch in late Fall of last year but was then delayed again. On 1 December Musk tweeted:

Falcon Heavy to launch next month from Apollo 11 pad at the Cape.

Elon Musk

To date (21 January 2018) the Falcon Heavy has still not had a test fire of its first stage engines. This means there are less than ten days to launch test the engines and then prepare the rocket for launch. Any issues during the test firing and the launch schedule will likely slip again into February.

If SpaceX has a successful launch it will still have to prove the reliability of the 27 engine design. The mass-numbers-of-engines design ultimately killed the Soviet program with four consecutive failures. SpaceX is reliant on business customers who have faith in their ability to deliver their payload into orbit. Continued delays and any failure will reduce confidence in the Falcon Heavy, risking it to have the fate of the Soviet N1.

(Story Update:  SpaceX had a successful test firing of the Falcon Heavy first stage booster today – 24 January 2018.)

An Indictment Against NPR Journalism Standards

22 Monday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, Honor, Journalism, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Image, racism, Taxes, Traditional Media, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

coal mining, Don Gonyea, Donald Trump, energy, entertainment, Ethics, journalism, journalism standards, journalists, Morning Edition, National Public Radio, News media, newsworthy, npr, Pennsylvania, soundbite, soundbites, Steve Innskeep

National Public Radio’s (NPR) Morning Edition is not alone in the race to lower journalism standards. It is; however, the latest example of how hard-hitting journalism has become a game of tossing softballs to ill-informed people for entertainment and soundbites.

Interview With a Trumpster

Friday morning (19 January 2018) Morning Edition’s Steve Inskeep and Don Gonyea were discussing Gonyea’s report on Donald Trump’s support in southwestern Pennsylvania. Included in his report was a soundbite of an interview with a Trump supporter using the name, Paul Walker:

Trump was not a politician. He did not come up through all the bullcrap and the handshakes and the elbow-rubbing. He came in. And I think it’s a direct approach. I like his twitters (ph). If you watch my Twitter account, I retweet just about everything that he puts out.

Gonyea then implied that people from the coal mining areas like Trump because they believe government regulation is taking away coal mining jobs. The next soundbite was of Republican State Senator Camera Bartolotta who explained the rationale behind Trumpster’s alleged “war on coal” sentiment:

…we have to fight for our jobs… Of course coal mining is different now. Of course you’re not going to need 2,000 coal miners in a coal mine. We’ve got automation. We’ve got machines. We’ve got, you know, better technology. But you know what? We still need coal.

As Gonyea ended his report, Steve Inskeep asked what seemed to be a prepared question for Gonyea:

…people on the left, …anytime we put Trump voters on the air. They ask – why keep interviewing Trump voters? They never change. They’re out of touch. Why? Why? Why?…Why talk to Trump voters?

Gonyea gave what seemed to be a prepared answer:

Well, first, we talk to voters of all kinds – of all stripes…As for the Trump voters, it’s important to know, A, if they’re still with him. But it’s good to hear how they talk about him and how that may change over time, if there are shifts. Is there strong support suddenly?…Also, in states where the vote’s very close, any movement among any voter group can make the difference.

The Indictment against NPR’s Morning Edition

Morning Edition violated basic journalism standards in the following ways:

Most of the information was based on opinion, not fact.

The man using the name, Paul Walker, expressed his opinion. State Senator Camera Bartolotta expressed her opinion of other people’s opinions. 

Walker, said: “Trump’s not a politician.” FACT:  Trump has run for political office many times. Trump has been a political figure for decades.

State Senator Bartolotta explained why Trump supporters feel they have to fight the government for coal mining jobs, then gave reasons why it wasn’t the government stealing coal mining jobs.

None of the opinions expressed were newsworthy.

These opinions are typical opinions of Trump supporters. The apparent news was that Trump supporters have the same opinions as they have always had. It is the classic dog bites man story. 

Information was meaningless.

The entire story was based on uninformed and/or incorrect opinions. The story was not exposing the lack of facts by the people interviewed but instead legitimized inaccurate and/or uninformed opinion. 

End Didn’t Justify the Story

The exchange between Inskeep and Gonyea seemed to be an attempt to justify poor journalism. Uniformed opinions are not news. They don’t add to the debate, and to focus on inaccurate opinion rather than fact leads people to believe that their opinion is valid regardless of how uninformed, racist, or inappropriate it is to be expressed. It encourages people to become more extremist in order to attract the attention of the media.

*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*

Trumpster Babble Shorthand

Babble #1 – “Trump’s a straight shooter” = He doesn’t research or listen to people, he just says the first thing to come into his head.

Babble #2 – “Trump speaks for the little guy.” = Trump says what uneducated racist is thinking.

Babble #3 – “We have to stop giving all our money to the government.” = I don’t want to pay for the privilege of living in the United States of America. 

Babble #4 – “Trump is keeping people from coming to America and stealing our jobs.” = I’m racist so I can blame people of color for taking jobs I would never apply for because they’re beneath me, or far beyond my qualifications.

Babble #5 – “Trump’s not a politician” = He’s inexperienced. 

Babble #6 – “We need jobs!” = We need jobs that pay lots of money to people in a small town with few skills and only a high school degree…or less.

Popes That Damned Women, Choice, and Humanity

21 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, Aging, Ethics, Generational, History, Politics, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Technology, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anglican Communion, birth control, Catholic, Catholic Church, church, contraceptives, Lambeth Conference, Pope, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope Pius XI, population control, pregnancy, religion, Second Vatican Council, Vatican II, Women, women's choice, Women's Rights

Pope Pius XI in 1930 and Pope Paul VI in 1968 had opportunities to extract the Catholic Church from the debate on birth control options for women. Both Popes had religious councils that suggested women using contraception should be allowed under some circumstances. Both Popes rejected those opinions and strictly forbade women having medical options in preventing pregnancy. 

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini, ordained 1920

Pope Paul VI as a new Catholic priest

By Brescia Photo – Instituto Paolo VI, Public Domain, Link

1930 – The Church Takes A Stand

In 1930, the Anglican Communion (the alliance of Churches associated with the Church of England) held their seventh conference known as the Lambeth Conference. This Conference, held once each decade, brought together representatives of the Anglican Churches around the world to discuss religious issues.

At the 7th Lambeth Conference the representatives, by a 193 to 67 (47 abstentions,) passed Resolution 15 that would allow certain methods of contraception provided it was, “…done in the light of the same Christian principles.”

The Catholic Church was not affected by this Resolution; however, Pope Pius XI felt he had to respond to the Conference’s Resolution with his own proclamation on New Year’s Eve the same year. For the first time in Church history, the Pope insisted that the only justifiable reason for sexual relations was for procreation. He said that anytime, “…the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature..” 

Pope Pius XI reaction to the Lambeth Conference was obviously his belief of the moral superiority of the Catholic Church, but 38 years later Pope Paul VI was not attempting to respond to actions of other churches. Instead, he was squelching his own committee that had been called to review the teachings of the Church.

Birth Control Guided Away From Vatican II

The Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) was convened in October 1962 and ended in December 1966. It was established to assess the role of the Church in modern life. The decisions of the Council resulted in many changes to the Church doctrine, but women’s use of contraceptives was not one of the issues discussed. 

Some in the Church wanted to bring the issue of contraception methods into the discussions during Vatican II, but instead, Pope John XXIII established a commission in 1963, that reported directly to him. The task of the commission was to study questions of birth control and population. Pope John XXIII died later that year and Pope Paul VI continued the commission to its completion in 1966.

The commission, by a 64 to 5 vote determined that the use of medical contraceptives was an extension of the method of monitoring a woman’s fertility cycle and was not inherently evil. Information about the report was leaked to the media prior to publication and Catholics around the world began to believe the Church was about to liberalize the teachings regarding the use of birth control.

A Handful of Men Kill Women’s Choice

Despite the findings of the study, a minority report by four priests vehemently opposed the decision. They stated that if the Church’s position was reversed, it would mean the declarations of Pope Pius XI and other church leaders of the past would be seen as false teachings.

Pope Paul VI chose to follow the minority report and rejected the commission’s findings. He reaffirmed the Church’s position that women should not be able to prevent a pregnancy with contraceptives.

Why Did Pope Paul VI Reject the Findings?

The four most likely factors contributing to Pope Paul VI’s rejection are as follows:

  1. The Catholic Church has been consistent in discouraging the idea that worshipers have a personal relationship with God. The Church has preferred that personal choices should be made using the Church to guide them.
  2. A historical perspective in the Church that women are subservient to men and not worthy of positions of religious leadership; therefore, a woman’s choice to want to avoid pregnancy is irrelevant.
  3. Pregnancy is an act of God, not of humans.
  4. Pope Paul VI was not a woman, never married, and rumored to be gay.

It is unlikely that any Pope will ever reconsider the issue of birth control. Note that when Pope Paul VI made his declaration in 1968, the population of the world was 3.5 billion people. The world population is now 7.6 billion. 

NASA’s Orion Capsule: A ‘Look Busy’ Project?

19 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Management Practices, NASA, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, Technology, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Airbus, Amber Gell, Amy Shira Teitel, Apollo, cosmic radiation, Curious Droid, Earth, engineer, Gemini, Kelly Smith, Lara Kearney, LEM, Lockheed Martin, lunar module, manned space program, manned spacecraft, Mars, Mercury, Moon, NASA, orbit, Orion, Paul Shillito, Space Shuttle, spacecraft, STS-135, Van Allen Belts, Vintage Space

NASA has a publicity campaign for the next generation of spacecraft. It is the Orion capsule, and it is touted as the spaceship that will take us back to the Moon and beyond. The problem is that all the talk doesn’t match reality.

8 July 2011, STS-135 – The final launch of a USA spacecraft

On 8 July 2011, I stood several miles away from Kennedy Space Center and watched the end of the United States manned spacecraft program. I stood in the warm sunshine of Florida as the last Space Shuttle (STS-135) soared into the sky. Since then NASA has put our astronauts in space by paying Russia to take them to and from the International Space Station (ISS.) 

A few months before that last Space Shuttle flight NASA announced the development of a new spacecraft called Orion. The announcement came so abruptly that it seemed that NASA was unaware it wouldn’t have a spacecraft to send humans into space until just before the end of the Space Shuttle program.

Orion – A Spacecraft of Contradictions

The Orion program, for all its hype, seems to have major flaws that NASA doesn’t seem to notice, or perhaps, hopes the public won’t notice. NASA’s description of the purpose of Orion:

For the first time in a generation, NASA is building a human spacecraft for deep-space missions that will usher in a new era of space exploration…and this new spacecraft will take us farther than we’ve gone before, including to the vicinity of the Moon and Mars…the Orion spacecraft is designed to meet the evolving needs of our nation’s deep space exploration program for decades to come. Orion deep space exploration missions…will help put NASA and America in a position to unlock the mysteries of space and to ensure this nation’s world preeminence in exploring the cosmos.

Orion a USA Spacecraft????

Lockheed Martin Corporation is designing and building the capsule of Orion. Like the Apollo capsule, Orion can only be separated from the Service Module for a short period of time.

The Service Module is the business section of Orion. It supplies all the power, fuel, oxygen, and is the primary propulsion of the spacecraft. Anyone familiar with Apollo 13 knows what happens to the capsule when the Service Module is non-functioning. The Service Module is being built by Airbus, a French corporation, for the European Space Agency.

Orion Capsule: A Human Storage Shed in Space

In Space, Size Matters

The Apollo capsule had a volume of 5.9 m³ (210 ft³.) Apollo astronauts were able to use the 6.7 m³ (235 ft³) space in the Lunar Module (LEM) during the three day trip between Earth and Moon. The total volume of the Apollo capsule and LEM was 12.6 m³ (445 ft³) for three astronauts. On the return, the Apollo astronauts were restricted to the capsule. Each astronaut had about 2 m³ in the capsule or 4 m³ in the capsule/LEM configuration.

Orion has 8.95 m3 (316 cu ft) of habitable space for four astronauts. This is slightly more cubic meters per astronaut than the Apollo capsule and much less than Apollo’s capsule/LEM configuration. The idea that Orion is capable of taking four astronauts on an eight-month journey to Mars is absurd. Orion is only for use in short-term, near-Earth missions.

NASA has briefly acknowledged the space issue in a video. Amber Gell of Lockheed Martin briefly touches on the need for an add-on crew habitat. She implies that it is an issue that NASA has yet to address. If it takes NASA twelve years to design and build a slightly bigger version of the 1960’s Apollo spacecraft, how long will it take them to build a crew quarters that four people can live in for up to three years?

NASA’s Misleading Video about Orion

NASA has been pumping out videos of engineers explaining how Orion is the next great achievement of the space agency. The videos cover a variety of subjects and some are pre-test and post-test news releases of Orion’s systems and structure. One video features Kelly Smith, a NASA Engineer, who explains how Orion is being designed to deal with the radiation from the Van Allen Belts around Earth.

The 2014 NASA video, titled, “Orion: Trial By Fire,” describes the challenges of the first test flight, including a dramatic description of the dangers of flying through the radiation of the Van Allen Belts above Earth. He explains that Orion will be designed to protect the astronauts as they fly through these dangerous regions.

The problem is that NASA already solved that problem with Apollo. They either fly around the Van Allen Belts, or through the thinner sections, as described by a video by Amy Shira Teitel of Vintage Space, and a video by Paul Shillito of Curious Droid.

There is a radiation issue in space, namely cosmic radiation, and it is a problem on long trips beyond Earth orbit; however, as Lara Kearney of NASA’s Orion Crew and Service Module’s Office explains in another NASA video, that they don’t have the answer to the cosmic radiation problem. This video contradicts the enthusiastic Smith video and raises the question:  Does NASA know what they are doing?

Orion:  The NASA Glacial-Paced Project

In May 1961, President John F. Kennedy asked Congress to fund a space program to take to the Moon and safely back. From the time of his speech in 1961 to the end of 1972, NASA launched the five of the six manned Mercury missions, designed, tested, built, and launched 10 Gemini manned missions, designed, tested, built, and launched 11 Apollo manned missions, landed men on the Moon, and overcame a disaster that delayed the manned launches for 21 months. Eleven years, three complete rocket programs, 27 manned missions, six successful Moon landings, no prior experience.

Orion, a slightly larger version of the Apollo capsule, only useful for short-term habitation in near-Earth orbit, is taking twelve years. Something is amiss.

NASA’s ‘Look Busy’ Project?

NASA definitely needs more funding, but something else is wrong. NASA’s Orion project doesn’t make any sense unless they are attempting to create the appearance that they are moving forward with a manned space program. The Orion project is, at best, an Earth to orbit elevator. It can’t meet any of the stated manned spaceflight goals of NASA. The question is, why isn’t NASA aware of these issues, and if they are aware, what is the agenda that is causing them to promote a project that is meaningless to the stated goals of deep space flight?

Government Shutdown An Opportunity

18 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

115th Congress, border wall, budget, DACA, democracy, Democrat, Democrats, Donald Trump, federal budget, government shutdown, ICE, immigrants, Mexican Immigrants, Net Neutrality, Republican, Tax Cut and Jobs Act, Twitter, US Customs, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, US/Mexican Border

DACA protesters in San Francisco 5 September 2017

Time for Democrats to take a stand

A government shutdown is a bad thing. It creates a lot of problems and it affects a lot of people. Typically, one political party is blamed, and that creates a risk of losing elections.

But this is a different moment in time. People are tired of being mowed over by the Republican party. People are tired of the Democrats always giving up concessions only to have the Republican take more away later. It’s time for Democrats to take a stand and not flinch.

Provisions To Avoid a Government Shutdown

Democrats can’t take the stand for just one issue. It has to be for several core issues and they cannot negotiate away any of the issues. Democrats should demand the following Provisions:

  1. All DACA recipients will be given a 20-year deferral and shall have preferred status in obtaining citizenship provided they are employed, a full-time student, are not convicted of a felony and pay all taxes as required.
  2. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be restricted from taking any action on any immigrant unless the person has committed a felony. All immigrants in custody that have not committed a felony will be released.
  3. Net Neutrality must be restored.
  4. All measures passed by the House or Senate must achieve a two-thirds majority for the remainder of the 115th Congress, and for the 116th Congress if Republicans maintain a majority in the House or Senate.
  5. The 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act is repealed except for those tax cuts for those earning under $250,000.
  6. All Trump appointees must be removed from office and all acts by those appointees are to be rescinded. All new appointees must be meet Provision 4, above.
  7. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to make any Executive Orders for the remainder of his term, and all of his previous Executive Orders by President Donald Trump are rescinded.
  8. All funding for a wall between Mexico and the United States will be void, with the exception of sections of the border that both Mexico and the United States agree upon.
  9. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to have a Twitter account.
  10. President Donald Trump must pay for all services and costs when not staying in the White House or other government-owned facilities.

Shutdown Better Than Alternative?

These ten provisions may seem harsh. The alternative may be mass work stoppages, strikes, and protests, which is what will likely happen if the Democrats fail to stop the Republicans from destroying our country.

Should the Nuremberg Code Be Applied to Internet Data Collection?

17 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Crime, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Belmont Report, crimes against humanity, Data collection, Human experimentation, Informed Consent, medial research, Nazi, Nazi Germany, Nazis, Nuremberg, Nuremberg Code, Nuremberg Ethics, Nuremberg Trials, Privacy, World War II

From the war crimes trials of World War II came a set of rules of human research

Privacy and dignity of the customer or user is not a big concern to business in the post-Internet world. Before a person can use software or a smartphone application (app) they are typically required to consent to an extensive agreement that only a lawyer could understand. Businesses may skip a signed agreement and collect personal information on the customer or user regardless of whether the person knows or consents to the data collection.

This type of collection of data on personal activity is often bought and sold for profit. It raises the question of why the business world is exempt from research restrictions that are applied to all other research involving humans. The possession of personal data also presents the opportunity for abuse of less ethical companies and by political and criminal organizations.

Post-WWII Guidelines For Human Experimentation

Prior to World War II, Germany established a set of standards required in human research. When Hitler came to power he wiped these standards away and Nazi researchers were allowed to experiment as they saw fit.

After World War II trials were held in Nuremberg (or Nürnberg,) Germany to bring justice for the crimes against humanity by Nazi war criminals. Among the crimes were medical experiments performed on prisoners without their knowledge or consent. Many people were harmed and some died as a result of these experiments.

The judges of the trials, moved to action by the testimony, created a set of rules called the Nuremberg Code, to define appropriate research from harmful research. This Code is not law; however, it can be used to determine a legal standard when a researcher violates any of the ten rules of the code. Human research in most civilized nations is governed by the Nuremberg Code.

However, the Nuremberg Code has always been applied to medical and scientific research, not to business situations. In 1947, the idea that business would be invading the privacy of their customers and collecting data on human interactions wasn’t a reality that anyone could envision. 

The Codes Governing Human Research

In 1972 a 40-year study of African American men in Alabama, known as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, was uncovered. The study was performed by the U.S. Health service and they did not follow the Nuremberg Code. They did not inform the participants that they were part of a syphilis experiment, nor did they tell the patients they were infected with syphilis, and after an effective treatment for syphilis was discovered, they continued to leave the men untreated.

After this incident, a conference was held to establish guidelines for all federal research. That conference created the Belmont Report that established three guidelines:

  1. Respect for persons: protecting the autonomy of all people and treating them with courtesy and respect and allowing for informed consent. Researchers must be truthful and conduct no deception;
  2. Beneficence: The philosophy of “Do no harm” while maximizing benefits for the research project and minimizing risks to the research subjects; and
  3. Justice: ensuring reasonable, non-exploitative, and well-considered procedures are administered fairly — the fair distribution of costs and benefits to potential research participants — and equally.

If a college professor is studying the interaction among college students they cannot collect data on their students without their knowledge, nor can they try different stimulus on their students without their knowledge. All research, even social research, requires oversight by a research committee. Strict guidelines restrict all the aspects of the data collection, and how it is used. This applies to all federal research and all organizations receiving federal subsidies.

Once again, the rules for human research established by the Belmont Report occurred before the Internet was being used by businesses to collect data on consumers.

Business Data Collection 2018 

It is common in business, and especially on the Internet, for companies to collect data about their customers or users. The problem is that some of the data has nothing to do with the company or application being used. The organization collects this data to sell to other companies for any use they see fit.

There is a start-up company near Seattle that created a phone app for people to buy and sell personal items. All a person has to do is take a picture of the item they want to sell, post it on the app, set a price, and wait for other users to contact them. It’s a garage sale on a smartphone.

The company received millions of dollars in venture capital, not because the app was expected to make money. The app is free and there is no fee collected on any user transaction. The investors were interested in the data that the app would collect to be sold to other companies.

This is the gold mine of the business world. Save money in advertising by only reaching the people who might need, want, or qualify for the product or service.

Violations of the Nuremberg Code in Business

Under the Nuremberg Code, every business would be required to clearly inform the customer of the data collected, what the data would be used for, and obtain her or his voluntary consent prior to collecting data. The use of the data would have to aim for positive results for society, not just for the financial benefit of the company. The business would also have to prove that it couldn’t be collected in another method.

Data collected would have to be proportion to the humanitarian benefits. It would have to be done by people that understand and are qualified to do the research.

Clearly, the restrictions of the Nuremberg Code are not being followed by most businesses collecting data on their customers. This collection and selling of personal data is so insidious that most people will never know what data is being collected, nor how it is being used to manipulate them. 

At this point, there is no oversight of the data being collected. It is an issue that lurks in the background of the business-as-usual environment. It is a practice, like the Tuskeegee Syphilis Experiment, will likely be misused, if it hasn’t been already.

*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*

The Nuremberg Code

  1. Required is the voluntary, well-informed, understanding consent of the human subject in a full legal capacity.
  2. The experiment should aim at positive results for society that cannot be procured in some other way.
  3. It should be based on previous knowledge (e.g., an expectation derived from animal experiments) that justifies the experiment.
  4. The experiment should be set up in a way that avoids unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injuries.
  5. It should not be conducted when there is any reason to believe that it implies a risk of death or disabling injury.
  6. The risks of the experiment should be in proportion to (that is, not exceed) the expected humanitarian benefits.
  7. Preparations and facilities must be provided that adequately protect the subjects against the experiment’s risks.
  8. The staff who conduct or take part in the experiment must be fully trained and scientifically qualified.
  9. The human subjects must be free to immediately quit the experiment at any point when they feel physically or mentally unable to go on.
  10. Likewise, the medical staff must stop the experiment at any point when they observe that continuation would be dangerous.

About This, About Writing

13 Saturday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, April Fools Day, Branding, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Crime, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, genealogy, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Opinion, Panama, Photography, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Rotary, Science, Science Fiction, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Tom Peters, Travel, Universities, US History, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Blogging, Paul Kiser, Paul Kiser's Blog, PAULx talks, rebranding, Wordpress, writing

In the Beginning

Eight years ago I started writing this blog. I had assumed that writing a blog would put me in front of a broad audience anxiously awaiting my next post.

It didn’t….but I kept writing. I wrote about business, human behavior, human resources, management, social media, my personal life, Rotary, public relations, history, time, blogging, travel, Nevada, global warming, spaceflight, politics, my stroke, April Fool’s Day, religion, science fiction, science, photography, media, more history, Panama, gay marriage, the future, great people, not-so-great people, education, Moffat County, patriotism, more politics, and fantasy.

There were a few bright moments when I touched upon a topic that caught some attention, but for the most part, my writing has simply been an expression of my opinions and ideas. I’ve discovered, writing is more important than being read.

Writing, For Me

A blog is like writing a diary or a book. It is meant to a personal statement. Someday, my children or my children’s children may read it and know more about me. I find comfort in that thought. 

My articles became less frequent in the last few years, but recently I have experienced a rebirth of writing. I suspect that my sleep apnea may be one of the issues causing the decline in writing. My brain was starved of oxygen and sleep every night for many years. Now that I am being treated for it, my cognitive functions seem to be reengaging.

Writing a blog has improved my communication skills, and has helped me organize my thoughts. This, this thing I’m doing, is an unfinished novel about the world from one perspective. I’m not a great writer, but I’m better than I was eight years ago.

For the last month, I have been publishing a new article every day. I don’t know that I will keep up that pace, but it is forcing my brain to think, and that is the goal.

Rebranding My Writing

I have decided to rename my blog. First, the term ‘blog’ has developed a negative meaning to many people, so I needed to drop the term. Second, my last name is not as relevant as it was a year ago, before I discovered that biologically, I am not a ‘Kiser.’ 

I tried several title ideas but finally settled on PAULx talks. It is the 2.0 version of Paul Kiser’s Blog. I don’t have a destination in mind for my writing. I never have, but I’ll see where this takes me.

Rapid HR Hiring Process Required In Professional Environment

11 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Human Resources, Management Practices, Public Image, Public Relations, Technology, Universities, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

background checks, discrimination, EEOC, higher education, hiring process, HR, Human Resources, recruiting, references, universities

Apollo Mission Control sits empty now. Just like a lot of professional offices.

Highly Skilled Workers are MIA and HR is part of the problem

Large organizations, especially government organizations, are losing great applicants because Human Resources is not keeping pace with the reality of the recruitment environment.

Challenges to Hiring Highly Skilled Workers

The issues:

  1. the workforce has not kept pace with the growth in highly educated and skilled jobs
  2. unemployment is now nearly down to four percent
  3. professional salaries and benefits have flattened as executive salaries have fattened
  4. executives have become more insensitive to workers and less humble about their value to the organization
  5. Human Resources have created a massive bureaucracy that is inhibiting the hiring process 

The problem often comes down to the Human Resources department. About the time the Personnel Department became Human Resources, the wizards of bureaucracy established an elaborate maze of hoops and ladders that managers and departments had to push a candidate through to hire a person. Their stated justification for their hiring procedures was to avoid liability and discrimination issues.

The truth is that the policies and procedures of Human Resources also keeps their hand in the organizational functions, and that is job security. 

What Human Resources is Required to Do

Every company should have safeguards in place to verify the qualifications and backgrounds of potential employees, ensure that all applicants are considered without discrimination (regarding race, color, religion, sex – including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy, national origin, people age 40 or older, disability or genetic information,) and determine a fair and competitive salary/benefit package.

However, only discrimination issues need to be determined for all applicants, and that process must happen before the final selection is completed. Everything else only involves the person that is going to be offered the job.

Once the selection process is completed, Human Resources should be verifying the background and determining the salary and benefits package for the candidate being offered the job. There is no excuse for the final offer process to take longer than a day.

Checking References BS

Wait, I just heard every Human Resource recruiter tell me that the verification of references of a potential employee take forever. References are a joke. Anyone who offers a poor reference is risking a lawsuit, so the time-honored process of checking references is absolutely unnecessary.

Most large organizations complete an I-9 verification, a criminal background check, a credit check, and sometimes a Google Search. A reference is not going to offer as much information as other methods of background checks.

Under the current environment, checking a reference after a job is offered would be acceptable because only something that uncovered a lie by the applicant would be significant, and that would be cause for termination.

Organizations that can’t whip their Human Resources department into reality are risking more failed recruitment searches and watching great people go to their competition.

Highly skilled labor jobs outpacing unskilled labor

Zuma Fail: Why Space Is No Place For Private Business

10 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, History, Management Practices, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, Taxes, Technology, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CIA, deployment, Failure, fairing, launch, military, NASA, Northrop Grumman, rocket, Satellite, secret payload, secret satellite, Space, SpaceX, spy satellite, Zuma

SpaceX Zuma Launch: What went up, but what came down?

On Sunday SpaceX launched Zuma, a super secret, we-can-tell-you-but-then-we-have-to-kill-you military satellite built by Northrop Grumman. It was the most important, most expensive military satellite that we know nothing about…except that it may, or may not have made it into orbit, it may or may not have separated from the second stage booster, it may or may not have burned up as it came back down into the atmosphere, and it may or may not have come down in the Indian Ocean.

Like two boys standing in the backyard after a window has been broken, SpaceX yelled, “We didn’t do it!,” and Northrop Grumman is looking down, kicking the dirt and saying, “We’re not gonna say anything.” It feels like the 1960’s and the Soviets are running our space program. 

What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate

This is why private business has no place in space. Private business is incapable of telling the truth to the public and they are hiding behind the skirt of the military hoping no one will notice that there is no state secret about whether a satellite made it into orbit or not.

The United States Government has to be an adult. If they send a rocket up and it fails, they have to tell us what happened. Private business, like the 1960 Soviet space program, believes that the public only needs to know about how great they are, and anything negative is to be a secret.

In the absence of the truth we can only assume that both SpaceX and Northrop Grumman are at fault and no more taxpayer money should be spent until they both can act like adults.

(SEE:  CBS article with full SpaceX Zuma launch video)

(SEE: Independent YouTube video of SpaceX Zuma launch)

The Zuma Fairing Mystery?

During the Zuma launch, the SpaceX announcer pauses his commentary for ninety seconds after saying the fairing would deploy (eject) “…any second now..” He then came back on and switched topics, then finally confirmed the fairing deployment. Why the long pause?

  • T+0:50 seconds (50 seconds after liftoff) – A SpaceX announcer begins a live and nearly continuous commentary regarding upcoming events with the Falcon 9 rocket, pausing only for those events to be confirmed by SpaceX control.
  • T+2:03 – SpaceX announcer pauses as four events related to second stage separation are about to begin.
  • T+3:06 – SpaceX announcer resumes commentary and confirms a successful second stage separation, and explains at T+3:15 that fairing separation “…should occur any second now” (ejection of protective nose shell around satellite.) He continues on to say that he will confirm the fairing separation after it occurs.
  • T+3:26 – SpaceX announcer begins a pause that lasts for one minute and thirty seconds.
  • T+4:57 – SpaceX announcer says, “Alright, so we’ll address the fairing deployment in a second once we have more information, but for now we’re going to shift our transition back to our secondary mission…”
  • T+5:17 – SpaceX announcer says, “…ah, quick sidebar here that we did get confirmation that the fairings did deploy.”

 

12 Days in 1968

06 Saturday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, Aging, Arts, Crime, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Panama, Photography, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Science, Space, Technology, The Tipping Point, Traditional Media, Universities, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1968, Apollo 7, Apollo 8, Apollo missions, assassination, Black Panthers, Catholic Church, Civil Rights, Elections, Feminism, Florida Education Association, George Wallace, Humanae vitae, John F. Kennedy, Jr., Lyndon B. Johnson, Martin Luther King, Moon, Moon landing, North Korea, police, Pope Paul VI, President Richard Nixon, Protests, Richard M. Nixon, Riots, Robert Kennedy, sit-ins, teacher's strike, USS Pueblo, Vietnam War, Women's Rights

May 1968 – Student injured in France in clash with police

1968. Fifty years ago our country was in chaos. Only five years had passed since President John F. Kennedy had been assassinated. The man who became President, Lyndon B. Johnson, had accomplished amazing milestones in civil rights, protections for the elderly (Medicare and Medicaid) and had expanded programs in public broadcasting and the arts, but the country was torn apart by the war in Vietnam, and he had increased the number of U.S. troops in the war to over half a million.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was still recovering from the  fire in January of the previous year that killed three astronauts as they sat helplessly in the command module on the launch pad, and the Apollo program had yet to launch a manned mission with only two years left to honor President Kennedy’s goal.

At the start of the year, everything in the world seemed to be collapsing. The year would test our society’s threshold of endurance. These are twelve days that defined 1968. (Source:  Wikipedia – 1968)

Captured crew of the USS Pueblo giving the finger to North Korea

  • January 23
    • North Korea seized the USS Pueblo, creating an international incident that remained in the news for most of 1968. North Korea claimed the ship was spying on their country and violated its territorial waters. Its mission was to observe and gather intelligence and at the time of capture, the crew attempted to destroy classified information on the Pueblo, but only succeeded in destroying a small amount of the documents and equipment. One crewmember was killed by North Korean fire in the attempt to capture the boat. The crew was tortured and starved during the eleven months of imprisonment. They were released just before Christmas 1968. The USS Pueblo is still held in North Korea and is still a commissioned ship of the United States Navy.
  • February 13
    • Civil rights disturbances occur at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This would be one of many protests, sit-ins, and riots, in the United States, England, France, Germany, and other countries over civil rights, the Vietnam war, and other social issues. Many of those involved in the year of civil disobedience would be injured or killed in clashes with law enforcement.
    • The Florida Education Association (FEA) initiates a mass resignation of teachers to protest state funding of education. This is, in effect, the first statewide teachers’ strike in the United States.
    • NET televises the very first episode of Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.
    •  
  • March 16
    • Vietnam War – My Lai Massacre: American troops kill scores of civilians. The story will first become public in November 1969 and will help undermine public support for the U.S. efforts in Vietnam.
    • President Lyndon B. Johnson, the incumbent, narrowly won the first Democratic primary to a minor candidate on March 11, and U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy entered the race for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. President Johnson would end his campaign two weeks after Kennedy makes his announcement.
    •  
  • April 4
    • Martin Luther King Jr. is assassinated at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. Riots erupt in major American cities, lasting for several days afterward.
    • A shootout between Black Panthers and Oakland police results in several arrests and deaths, including 16-year-old Panther Bobby Hutton.
    • A double explosion in downtown Richmond, Indiana kills 41 and injures 150.
  • May 17
    • The Catonsville Nine enter the Selective Service offices in Catonsville, Maryland, take dozens of selective service draft records, and burn them with napalm as a protest against the Vietnam War.
    •  
  • June 5
    • U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy is shot at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles. Sirhan Sirhan is arrested. Kennedy dies from his injuries the next day.

Pope Paul VI: The man who brought the Church into couple’s beds

  •  July 25
    • Pope Paul VI publishes the encyclical entitled Humanae vitae, on birth control. This voided a church commissioned study (Pontifical Commission on Birth Control) that determined birth control to NOT be inherently evil, and that couples should decide for themselves about the use of birth control. The Pope’s decision inserted the church into a conflict that continues to this day.
  • August 20
    • The Prague Spring of political liberalization ends, as 750,000 Warsaw Pact troops, 6,500 tanks, and 800 planes invade Czechoslovakia. It is dated as the biggest operation in Europe since WWII ended.
  • September 6
    • 150 women (members of New York Radical Women) arrive in Atlantic City, NJ to protest against the Miss America Pageant, as exploitative of women. Led by activist and author Robin Morgan, it is one of the first large demonstrations of Second Wave Feminism as Women’s Liberation begins to gather much media attention.
  • October 11
    • Apollo program: NASA launches Apollo 7, the first manned Apollo mission (Wally Schirra, Donn Eisele, Walter Cunningham). Mission goals include the first live television broadcast from orbit and testing the lunar module docking maneuver. The United States is back in space for the first time since the Apollo 1 disaster.
    • In Panama, a military coup d’état, led by Col. Boris Martinez and Col. Omar Torrijos, overthrows the democratically elected (but highly controversial) government of President Arnulfo Arias. Within a year, Torrijos ousts Martinez and takes charge as de facto Head of Government in Panama.
  •  
  • November 5
    • U.S. presidential election, 1968: Republican challenger Richard Nixon defeats the Democratic candidate, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, and American Independent Party candidate George C. Wallace. President Nixon would throw the country into a Constitutional crisis six years later and be forced to resign from office.
  • View of Earth from Apollo 8 as it orbited the Moon

  • December 24
    • Apollo program: U.S. spacecraft Apollo 8 enters orbit around the Moon. Astronauts Frank Borman, Jim Lovell and William A. Anders become the first humans to see the far side of the Moon and planet Earth as a whole. Anders photographs Earthrise.

Trump Corrupt Public Relations: Using Business PR as the Model

05 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Management Practices, Politics, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Taxes, Traditional Media, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

credibility, deceive, deception, disclosure, facts, misleading, PR, Press Secretary, Public Relations, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, truth, White House

Sarah Huckabee Sanders:  White House Deception Secretary

The White House has a corrupt public relations strategy. On 19 December 2017, Sarah Huckabee Sanders stood before the nation and stated, “On the personal side, the president will likely take a big hit.” She’s talking about the tax cut for corporations and the mega-wealthy. Donald Trump even went farther to say that he’d be a “big loser.”

To be honest, I’m not sure if he was talking about himself or the tax plan.

Two days later, after trying to dodge a direct question about whether Donald Trump will personally benefit from the new tax plan passed by Congress, she said, “Look, the bottom line is that a lot of people are going to do really well with under this, the President is an American, and Americans are going to benefit…”

As the White House Press Secretary, Huckabee Sanders is known for her contradictory statements. She seems to have no ethical sense of honesty and factual disclosure. She is the model corporate public relations (PR) person.

Many corporations act as if they have no obligation of full disclosure. They seem to believe that full disclosure is contrary to their business interest. The concept of controlling information, never admitting a negative issue, and never taking responsibility are commonplace in the corporate public relations world. These corporations see the job of the PR person as a corporate cheerleader, not a provider of information.

Government is meant to serve the public and is required to give full disclosure; however, under the Trump administration, public relations is handled under the corporate PR model.

As with corporate PR, the strategy of Huckabee Sanders doesn’t have access to all the facts so that she can honestly say “I don’t know that to be a fact.” She references what other sources state rather than answer a direct question. She uses all the tactics of a corrupt approach to public relations that is designed to deflect and mislead questions and issues.

It is a self-destructive public relations strategy. It requires a constant stream of deception because the PR person has to continue to stay ahead of the discovery of the truth and expand the deception as facts come into public awareness. Eventually, it leads to the loss of all credibility and the PR person becomes the public fool that humiliates herself, and the organization she represents.  

Telsa Powerwall Has Product-Killing Questions Unanswered

04 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Green, Honor, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Science, solar, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

batteries, battery, battery cycle, battery lifespan, charge, cycle, discharge, Elon Musk, Fire, fire tests, Galaxy Note 7, journalists, lithium fire, lithium-ion, National Fire Protection Association, NFPA, power per kilowatt, Powerwall, punctured lithium battery, Reno Gazette-Journal, reporters attacked, safety, Samsung, SpaceX, Tesla

What is Tesla trying to hide about its Powerwall?

I have great respect for a person who pushes boundaries and engages in future-vision projects. We currently lack the great visionaries of the past who established our nations great growth in technology and commerce.

That said, I have no respect or love for someone who toys with great ideas in order to build up consumer and investor hopes for personal profit while remaining silent on the issues that may eventually kill the great idea.

Enter Elon Musk.

I have expressed my reservations about his idea to build a space program to go to Mars, and I have additional reservations about his Falcon Heavy booster that is scheduled to launch sometime later this month.

But it is Tesla’s ‘Powerwall‘ product that has gaping issues that seem to be ignored in all the hype and mystic of Elon Musk. Two issues have to do with lithium-type batteries and their limitations and dangers.

Fantasy Cycles?
Tesla has a ten-year warranty on their Powerwall system. That sounds great, but it is the same as saying if you leave raw fish on the counter at room temperature it will be safe to eat in a year.

There are rules in chemistry. Batteries are defined by these rules. Every battery has a limited lifespan even if it is not used. Batteries also have a limit to the number of discharge/charge cycles it can undergo before they are no longer effective in holding a charge.

Lithium-ion batteries are superior to other types of batteries because they hold more charge per kilogram and they can be recharged. This makes them a good choice for a home power application.

However, lithium-ion batteries begin to deteriorate the moment they have been built. They lose about 5% of their charge capacity per month, and even if they are never used the lifespan of a typical lithium-ion battery is two years.

According to one source, lithium-ion batteries in the Powerwall are limited to between 800 to 1000 discharge/charge cycles. Assuming the Powerwall undergoes only one cycle per day, its useful lifespan is less than three years. Considering that with both normal use, and the natural deterioration of the batteries in the Powerwall, it will fail in less than two years.

But they’re under warranty for ten years, so who cares?

The chemical limitations of the lithium-ion battery are a fact. If Tesla strategy is to deal with massive warranty claims, then both investors and customers should be made aware. If Tesla has come up with some miracle technology they need to explain how they have overcome the chemical limitations.

The danger is that Tesla is aware of the limitations and is preparing for an alternative strategy such as bankruptcy in three or four years after they have squeezed the profits out of the company. Without further explanation, an alternate business strategy is the most likely scenario.

Burn Baby Burn
There is a reason that the FAA required a ban on the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 tablets on commercial flights. Bad lithium-ion batteries.

Lithium-ion batteries can overheat and burn or explode under certain conditions. If punctured they can burst into a fire that cannot be stopped by normal fire suppression tactics. The only way to prevent a lithium-ion fire from doing severe damage to the materials around it is to have a non-burnable barrier that can withstand the heat of a lithium fire.

The Powerwall encased in a metal, temperature-regulated, weather-proof housing. To my knowledge, there have been two tests performed on the Powerwall and its casing. Both tests were performed by a trade organization known as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA.) The NFPA is not a government, nor regulatory agency, and no information was found as regarding Tesla’s involvement in the design or limitations of the test.

One test performed a test of overheating one cell group to the point of failure. The fire did not spread to the other cells. The second test applied a steady flame to the exterior of the Powerwall. In that test, all cells overheated and failed, but the Powerwall did not explode, nor did the internal lithium fire breach the casing; however, the Powerwall was not mounted on, nor near any combustible material.

The Powerwall does include a system of heating and cooling to keep the batteries within the range required to prevent failure leading to a fire; however, I cannot find any test of a complete cooling system failure in a hot environment, other than the controlled test done by Tesla and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA.)

I cannot find any testing as to the result of a puncture to the Powerwall. YouTube offers many videos on what happens when a lithium-ion battery is punctured. A puncture test of the Powerwall has not been released to the public, to my knowledge. 

If the Powerwall does not have extensive testing in various environmental situations then it may be impossible to know how dangerous the Powerwall is to mount on or near a wall that is combustible.

To my knowledge, Tesla is silent on this issue. On their website, I can find no information as to these issues about lithium-ion batteries or the safety testing done on the Powerwall casing.

In fact, Telsa is extraordinary reactive to journalists and media. In 2015, Tesla security guards used their ATV to reportedly ram a vehicle with journalists from the Reno Gazette-Journal, smashed their vehicle window, and cut their seatbelt to remove them, throwing them to the ground.

The journalists were taking pictures of the Tesla Powerwall plant under construction in Nevada. According to the newspaper’s attorney, Tesla security guards demanded the camera equipment and held the journalists against their will, created an alternate story that the journalist attacked them, and held them until the sheriff’s department arrived.

Image of inside of Reno Gazette-Journal’s vehicle after encounter with Tesla security guard

The incident suggests that Tesla is extremely sensitive to any unmonitored, unbiased release of information about its Powerwall product. The question remains: Why?  

Nevada’s Pot Business About to be Smoked

03 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Branding, Business, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Recreation, Respect, solar, Space, Taxes, Technology, Travel, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

California, Carson City, corporate tax cut, corporations, divorce, economies, economy, educational ranking, Elko, Ely, gambling, gaming, gold mining, Henderson, Indian gaming, Las Vegas, mining, Nevada, Reno, Unemployment, Violent Crime, Winnemucca

Welcome to Nevada, where citizens watch other people get rich

Nevada has relied on being the rebel for decades, and it always fails to provide a reliable economy.

When gambling was taboo in the nation, Nevada became one of the few places people could gamble. People flocked to Nevada to gamble. Nevada had a ‘gaming’ industry.

In 1988, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act opened the door to legalize gambling on Indian Reservations, and over the next three decades California built up an Indian Gaming industry that didn’t require taking chances with a trip to Nevada. Nevada’s gaming industry stagnated.

When a quick marriage and/or a quick divorce was taboo in the nation, Nevada made divorce easy. People flocked to Nevada to officially end or begin a relationship. Nevada had a marriage industry.

Then divorce became a fact of life and most of the rest of the country decided that government should be trying to inhibit the desires of a couple, so they made marriage and divorce easier. Couples no longer had to travel to Nevada to say their vows, or go their separate ways and Nevada’s marriage and divorce industry collapsed. 

Gambling, divorce, prostitution have all been part of Nevada’s economic plan, and they all have created more problems than money for its citizens. It’s a consistent trait of Nevada’s leadership in pursuing big money that comes with little or no foundation in what is best for the average citizen.

For the last six months, Nevada boosted its economy with legalized recreational marijuana sales. Again, people from California flocked to the state to get what they couldn’t get at home. Pot. And again, Nevada’s economic boost will be short-lived as California recreational pot business gets underway in 2018.

Nevada is a state where a few people become filthy rich and pay very little in taxes. Nevada compounds the problem by prostituting themselves for marginal industries that are not stable and corporations that seek to avoid paying their share of taxes while reaping big profits.

The result has been that Nevada has no money to improve schools that are ranked near the bottom in the United States. Nevada’s poor education record has resulted in businesses needing a highly educated workforce to go elsewhere despite the seductive tax environment.

Nevada has to stop lusting after short-term economies and start building a real economy…or watch the hopes and dreams of its citizens go up in smoke.

Need a New Plan for Gaining Political Support

02 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Democrat, Democrats, DNC, PAC, PAG, political action, political ads, political candidates, political causes, spam, spamming

 

About thirty percent of my emails are requests from political interests. They implore me to give them money to avoid the dire consequences that will surely happen if their cause is not successful. These are from progressive causes targeting liberals, not wealthy conservatives who actually have spendable incomes. 

Begging for money works on the street sometimes, but I can’t imagine any intelligent person that will be motivated by street tactics. It is embarrassing that the liberal viewpoint is being represented by groups that have all the skills and tact of a late-night, off-channel, ACT NOW television commercial.

If you want my attention, tell me what you’ve done and why you’ve done it. Tell me how you’ve spent money up to now. Give me a link to a website that I can go to if I want to learn more. Don’t threaten dire circumstances. Don’t beg for money. Don’t send me emails on a daily or even weekly basis. If I support your cause I might follow-up on it, but not if you annoy me.

We have major problems in this country and if a group’s best plan to solve the problem is to send me an email begging for money, then they’ve failed. Political causes HAVE TO STOP listening to political media hacks that tell them how they raised money in 2008 and start thinking of how to mobilize people to respond to the issues of 2018.

In case they haven’t noticed, the wealthy have figured out how to win politics with money, and they are really good at it. It’s time to out think Soviet Republicans and that shouldn’t be difficult, but outspending mega-corporations and the wealthy is not a competition in which I will participate.

SpaceX and Mars: The Illogical Strategy

23 Saturday Dec 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Government, Health, History, Management Practices, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Space, Technology, Travel, US History

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

booster landing system, engineering, habitats in space, Mars, NASA, propulsion, reusable booster, rockets, space exploration, space flight, Space Transportation System, SpaceX, weight

Parlor Trick:  Relanding a piece of junk and wasting payload fuel to do it

 

Fallacy:  It takes eight to nine months to get to Mars when the planets are in the correct position.

Fact:  Mars can be reached in a matter of weeks if the ship has the propulsion and fuel to increase speed beyond what is required for the Hohmann Transfer, and to reduce speed to insert into orbit around Mars. Also, a more powerful propulsion and fuel method can allow for trips to Mars even when the two planets are not in the ideal position.

Fallacy:  We don’t have the technology to protect humans from cosmic radiation for extended space journeys beyond Earth orbit.

Fact:  Again, we do have methods to protect astronauts from cosmic radiation, but the concepts add weight to the ship, and that means a better propulsion system is needed.

Getting to Mars is about ship and propulsion design. Period. Speed and weight will have to be increased to get astronauts safely there and back again. It costs money to achieve the goal.

This is the problem with SpaceX plan to go to Mars. Their approach has been to  ‘save money’ by developing a reusable booster system. That sounds great. That’s what the space shuttle was designed to provide, and now, thirty years later, SpaceX is trying to re-do what we’ve already done. Not only are they reinventing technology we already have, they are doing it wrong.

Returning a booster as a landing craft defeats the mission objective of going to Mars. It requires wasting time, money, and fuel to:

  1. design a booster landing system
  2. building and testing a booster landing system
  3. committing fuel that should be dedicated to the payload, to the booster landing system
  4. using personnel and resources to monitor and land the booster
  5. using personnel and resources to recover and rebuild the booster that is basically a piece of junk.

In addition, their approach to a reusable booster is contradictory to the goal of getting to Mars. It is absurd to think that one vehicle will liftoff from Earth, orbit Earth, go to Mars, orbit Mars, and land on Mars. Mars is not a pack-your-overnight-bag trip. To get to Mars will require boosting several payloads to be assembled in Earth orbit. Wasting fuel to put a payload into orbit in order to land the booster makes no sense.

Landing the booster stage on Earth is a parlor trick. It lets SpaceX look cool, and lets them claim they are saving money by reusing the booster. It makes people excited and cheer, but it is a waste of valuable resources. Landing on Mars will not be achieved by expending resources to re-land the booster on Earth.

Senator Dean Heller is Still a Stockbroker

20 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Business, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, History, Honor, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

career politician, Carson City, Dean Heller, Government, Las Vegas, Nevada, Pacific Stock Exchange, political stockbroker, Reno, Senate, Senator Dean Heller, stockbroker, Tax Cut and Jobs Act, USC

Senator Dean Heller and his client, Donald Trump

Dean Heller is a career politician who has been on the payroll of the government for almost 30 years. His primary ‘real world’ employment consists of five years (1983-1988) working as a stockbroker for Pacific Stock Exchange in California, two of those years he was finishing up his undergraduate degree at University of Southern California (USC.)

Despite his short stint in private business three decades ago , Heller is still a stockbroker serving the needs of his wealthy clients. He is a friend to the Nevada gaming corporations, the Nevada mining corporations, and the energy corporations. As a stockbroker politician, it’s not that Heller doesn’t like those who are not wealthy, he just doesn’t care about them, unless he can trick them into voting for him.

Earlier this year Senator Heller feigned his support of the average Nevada citizen by waiting until it was clear that Trump’s plan to end health insurance for millions was going to fall short by more than two Republican votes needed for passage, then he announced that he would be the fifth Republican to vote against it. His ‘no’ vote was meaningless, but he did exploit the opportunity to make it look like he was for the ‘little guy.’

Heller’s vote for the Tax Cuts for the Wealthy is consistent with his political stockbroker role in government. He can also be relied on to make cuts in programs that are vital to average Nevada citizens in the new year…unless, of course, other Republicans fail to support it, and then he will likely beat his breast and say that he also opposes it.

It’s sad that the average Nevada citizen’s best hope lies in Republican Senators from other states doing the correct thing, while Heller serves his wealthy masters.

Government Regulation Makes USA Business Great

17 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Human Resources, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Taxes, Technology, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

corporations, discrimination, enterprise, ethical business, Gender, Government oversight, products, race, regulation, service, Unethical Business Practices

Conservatives trash government regulation as a business killer. Ironically, the fact is that government regulation is what makes business in the United States successful. Without regulation, ethical business is pushed out to make room for people who lust for money. It is a ‘buyer be screwed’ mentality.

Business without oversight destroys ethical businesses

Sam and Joe Comparisons

Sam wants to start up a business. She determines what she must do and obtains all the needed licensing and inspections required, and abides by local, state, and federal laws. As she expands her business, she hires qualified workers and abides by the required payroll laws that protect the worker.

Joe starts up a similar business that competes with Sam’s business, but he sneaks around the laws. He only does what he has to do to not get caught. For code inspections he knows what they are looking for, and lies about what he is doing, so he avoids any government regulations that should apply to his business. As he expands his business, Jake pays people ‘under the table,’ to avoid paying taxes, doesn’t provide his employees with benefits, and doesn’t pay overtime. He warns the employees, that if they complain he’ll close down the business and they won’t have a job.

Which business will provide a more honest and trustworthy relationship with his/her customers? And which business provides good jobs? Which business will contribute more back to her/his community? More ethical? Will make more money?

Ethics and a Level Playing Field

The problem with business is that when the only rule is to make money, unethical practices will provide an advantage over the honest and ethical businessperson. Government regulation creates a level playing field for all corporations so that the honest businesses are not pushed out.

Government regulation and oversight of private business is not about crushing business, it is about saving business. It is empowering our citizens, through government employment, to serve as our protectors as workers and customers. It allows us to trust that a business is ethical and helping our nation.

By demonizing government regulation, unethical people seek to take advantage of other citizens of the United States of America. They swindle them out of money, abusing workers, bringing racism and discrimination into the workplace, and providing substandard and/or dangerous products and services.

Government regulation is not perfect, but until someone can find a better way of protecting the interests of our citizens, it is what we have, and it works.

The Nuclear Amendment

30 Thursday Nov 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Public Image, racism, Religion, Respect, Science, Taxes, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

115th Congress, Affordable Care Act, Amendment, citizenship, Donald Trump, GOP, Republican, Republicans, tax reform, United States of America, US Constitution

Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

Upon ratification of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America by at least two-thirds of all states and/or territories of the United States of America, all acts of the 115th Congress and of the 45th President shall be nullified and repealed retroactively. This amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America supersedes all other past and current federal, state, and local laws to the contrary.

In addition, upon ratification of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, all members of the 115th Congress who voted in favor of any legislation relating to adversely changing and/or the repeal of the Affordable Care Act and/or who voted in favor any tax reform bill shall have all personal assets seized, here and abroad, and shall lose citizenship to the United States of America.

In addition, upon ratification of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, the 45th President shall have all assets seized and shall lose citizenship to the United States of America.

In addition, upon ratification of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, all official and unofficial political appointees and/or advisors of the 45th President, including those nominated by of the 45th President, regardless of whether or not they are still holding the office, shall have all assets seized and shall lose citizenship to the United States of America.

In addition, upon ratification of this amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, all businesses and/or organizations that gained favored treatment, or profit on measures passed by the 115th Congress, or on actions, policies or, executive orders of the 45th President or any or his advisors, nominees, or appointees, shall forfeit twice the value of the actual, or estimated financial value of said action.

This is NOT an Excuse: Why Older White Men Sexually Harass Women

22 Wednesday Nov 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, History, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, The Tipping Point, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

children, Donald Trump, Education, management by intimidation, men, power, Ray Moore, sex, sex ed, sexual harassment, sexual relationships, wealth, Weinstein, Women

I need to be clear. Sexual harassment is and always has been wrong.

However, as an older white man, I can say that I am not surprised by the revelations coming out about women who have been sexually harassed by powerful older white men, I have to admit that I have been guilty of the same attitudes and behaviors.

Nothing that I have to say should be construed as an excuse for the behavior. No one should read this and feel any sympathy for men who have engaged in sexual harassment. This is simply an explanation of why I am not surprised by the recent revelations, and why I think almost all men of my age or older have a propensity to sexually harass women.

“Nothing that I have to say should be construed as an excuse for the behavior. No one should read this and feel any sympathy for men who have engaged in sexual harassment.”

I was born in 1957. My parents that raised me were married in 1939. My Dad was twenty years old, and my mother was fifteen…on the day she married. That was not typical; however, older men marrying younger women, even girls, was not uncommon, and during my childhood years, almost every Mom was a housewife.

As a child of the 1960’s, the idea that the man was dominant over a woman was not even questioned. Women were created to please men. The mindset was, women should not be overtly sexual and modest; therefore, it was the man’s place to initiate sexual actions. There was no formal instruction about initiating sexual intention with women, it was just expected that boys would learn as they go.

It was blatantly obvious to me, and probably most men my age, that power and wealth made men sexually attractive, and that women craved men who boldly took the initiative, so they didn’t have to pretend that they didn’t want sex. One way to win over a woman was to be in a position of power, and create a situation where the woman could submit to them.

“…that power and wealth made men sexually attractive, and that women craved men who boldly took the initiative, so they didn’t have to pretend that they didn’t want sex.”

The problem was, it worked. In hindsight, it didn’t work because the myth of women secretly wanting sex was true, it worked because the intimidation of a powerful man, and because most fell into the belief that it was a societal norm. Until I was in my late 20’s, the concept of sexual harassment was not even recognized as a problem in the workplace. A man marrying a subordinate was commonplace.

During my adult years, the development of workplace training began to take hold, and one of the primary topics became sexual harassment training. I, and most other men, were told that we had to be careful how we handled ourselves in the workplace, but that seemed to be focused on the workers, not so much on the executives.

When an issue of sexual harassment did come up with someone in management, companies hushed it up “to protect the woman,” and often the woman was given some type of compensation and moved out of the situation. In the business world, the human resources department enabled men to sexual harass women by treating it as an embarrassment for the company that needed to be dealt with internally, without law enforcement involvement.

There is no excuse for my behavior, nor the behavior of white men my age. In part, the problem is born of myths that are created in the absence of discussion and awareness of sex. Young boys will believe what other young boys will tell them when reliable information isn’t available.

We have to stop pretending that sex is only for married adults, and prior to marriage sex isn’t supposed to happen. Abstinence is an abomination to human interaction, and people who promote that idea don’t realize the damage they are doing to our society. Sex is not taboo or should it be embarrassing to discuss. It is a natural function of life.

We also have to stop letting companies deal with sexual harassment issues. Profit, public relations, and efficient operation of the business have no place in how a workplace sexual harassment issue is resolved.

“Profit, public relations, and efficient operation of the business have no place in how a workplace sexual harassment issue is resolved.”

Finally, I apologize to any woman who feels I have offended and/or been sexually inappropriate with. There is no excuse.

A Conversation With An Applette

14 Thursday Sep 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Information Technology, Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Android, Apple, Applette, cell phone, fad, Hype, iOS, iPhone, iPhone X, Samsung, Samsung Galaxy Edge, Smartphone

My iPho….I mean my Samsung Galaxy Edge Phone

Applette:    WOW! The new iPhone came out! I’ve got to get me one! Have you heard about it?

Me: A vague reference somewhere.

Applette:  They call it the iPhone X.

Me:  X for…?

Applette:  Most Excellent!

Me:  X is NOT always a ‘good’ reference.

Applette:  What do you mean?

Me:  Ex-con, Ex-spouse, expensive.

Applette:  No dude, this phone does everything!

Me:  Exfoliate! Does it exfoliate?

Applette:  What? What’s ex-foal-ate?

Me:  Nevermind.

Applette:  Here’s a picture of it! Look at that screen! It goes from edge to edge!

Me:  Oh, like this.

Applette:  WOW! You already own one!

Me:  No, this is a Samsung Galaxy Edge. I’ve had it for over a year.

Applette:  Samsung copied the iPhone! Those bastards!

Me:  No…the Edge…nevermind.

Applette:  It doesn’t matter. This iPhone is sooo much better than the copy cat Galaxy phone! It has facial recognition!

Me:  So does my dog.

Applette:  Yes, but can you make a call on your dog? HA!

Me:  No. I call my dog and she comes to me.

Applette:  Well,…wait…what?

Me:  Nevermind.

Applette:  I’ll bet your dog doesn’t have Siri!

Me:  Hey Google, what is Siri?

Google:  According to Webopedia, Siri is a built-in “intelligent assistant” that enables users of Apple iPhone 4S and later and newer iPad and iPod Touch devices to speak natural language voice commands in order to operate the mobile device and its apps.

Me:  So Siri is Apple’s version of HAL.

Applette:  Yeah!…who’s HAL?

Me:  Nevermind.

Applette:  The iPhone is reliable. Your Samsung is going to catch on fire someday!

Me:  Well, that was the Samsung Galaxy Note Pad, but I prefer to think that if I’m lost in the woods in the winter and I have no cell service, I can light a signal fire with my phone. My phone can save my life, can yours?

Applette:  Well, it…I…you can’t…

Me:  Nevermind.

Applette:  You wait. Apple is going to dominate the phone market with the iPhone X.

Me:  You think that people are going to pay more to learn a new phone system?

Applette:  If it’s an iPhone they will.

Me:  But Apple’s name is synonymous with incompatibility. They have products that aren’t even incompatible with other Apple products.

Applette:  Man, you’ve got to prioritize. Do you want to be cool, or do you want to get things done?

Me:  I want to get things done.

Applette:  And THAT is why you don’t have an iPhone, man.

Me:  Well, that and paying a lot more for something that isn’t.

Applette:  Well, iPhones cost more, but they have Siri and they have facial recognition, Dude. It doesn’t get any better than that!

Me:  Actually, it does, but nevermind.

My Four Fathers

16 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Communication, Ethics, genealogy, Generational, Management Practices, parenting, Pride, Public Image, Relationships, Respect, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Barrick, Colorado, Craig, Depue, Family, family history, Henderson, Kiser, siblings, son, Vernon Kiser, Waner

(To understand the background of this story see, Familius Interruptus, the explanation of how I learned through a DNA test that my father was not my father, and that my mother had an affair with another man known to our family.)

I had four fathers. Two of my fathers were real, tangible people. Both were good men and both were good fathers. One of my fathers was my biological father. I knew of him, and people have told me about him, but I never really knew him. He died when I was five years old.

One of my fathers was my man listed on my birth certificate. He was the man I always knew to be my Dad. He raised me and until a few months ago, I was led to believe he was my real father.

But I have two other fathers. They are the two men who I never got to know. They are ghosts of my past. They are the relationships I should have had with both my biological father, and my Dad, but were kept from me in a shroud of secrecy, rumors, and shame.

My Biological Father
My knowledge of my biological father is limited. He was a business owner in Craig, a small northwestern Colorado town. Based on everything I can gather, he was an amazing entrepreneur, creating and maintaining a business in a market that was too small, and too poor for the quality and experience his company offered.

My biological father

I have never heard anyone speak a negative word about my real father. His tragic death when I was only five, kept me from having any kind of relationship with him, and the shroud of secrecy that was maintained prevented me from interacting with the people who really knew him. 

It is ironic and poetic that it is the next generation of my biological family that reached out to me after a DNA test proved the link between myself and their family. It was their actions that brought clarity and truth to my family history, and I am grateful.

I regret not knowing my real father and being able to know him as my father. I also am saddened to think of his sons and their mother. His death occurred when his sons were young adults. From what I know of my real father, he would have been proud of who they became, and of their achievements with their families, their work, and their church. My lack of a relationship with my real father pales in comparison to their loss.

My Dad
The man who raised me worked hard all his life. He was often up on Mondays before five in the morning and on the road to the job site, over an hour away. He often stayed at the job site during the week, living out of a camping trailer. He operated heavy equipment, and as a child the words, Cat, Maintainer, and Scraper described the three types of heavy equipment that my father used to build roads and reservoirs.

My Dad, and my Mother

I was the youngest of four sons to my Dad. I remember going with my family to see my oldest brother play high school basketball, my next oldest brother play high school football, but I don’t remember my Dad going see my next to youngest brother in plays, nor do I remember him coming to any of my school events. I suspect that when I was a child, my Dad was at the job site when our events were happening.

If my Dad knew, or suspected that I was not his son, I was not aware of it. I have indications that my mother and he had a strange marriage, but as a child, I had nothing to compare their relationship with, nor did I have any reference to compare my relationship with my parents. In hindsight, I knew I was not the child that my parents beamed with pride over, but I attributed it to being the last of four boys.

The Kiser brothers and me (on left)

My mother posted an October 1968, Erma Bombeck column on our family scrapboard about the Caboose Child that was ‘planned about as well as a headache.’ At the time, I had no idea that my mother was probably well aware of who my real father was, but I didn’t understand the statement she was probably making when she posted this single article on the scrapboard.

I suspect my father also knew, and that is part of the story that is amazing and tragic. Most people would shun the bastard child, but to my knowledge, he didn’t. Our relationship wasn’t close, but he could have justifiably shunned me, and he didn’t.

That is the Dad I didn’t get to know. The man who probably knew I was not his child, but raised me anyway. Regardless of what happened one day in March of 1957, he chose to be my Dad. I wish that before his death, I could have expressed my appreciation for living with the knowledge that few men would have had the character to move beyond.

My Dad wasn’t a perfect father, but he was a father to me, when he could have rejected me. I had a relationship with my Dad that I knew, and I wish I could have had a relationship with the part of my Dad who had to deal with the reality that I was as a son of another man.

I am too late, but I want to express gratitude to my fathers, and wish them a belated Happy Father’s Day.

Job Killing: The Republican Prime Directive

25 Thursday May 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Human Resources, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

BLS, Bureau of Labor Standards, Employment, GOP, government jobs, high paying jobs, job creation, jobs, Manufacturing jobs, Republican, Republicans, Trump's finances, Unemployment

There may be no political party in the history of the world that has killed more jobs, or enacted legislation to kill jobs, than the Republicans of the United States of America. They attempt to deny their legacy and claim that it is government that is killing jobs, while also claiming that illegal immigrants are taking high paying jobs from our citizens. Those are damn lies.

Trump’s SS forces raid homes to allegedly save high paying jobs for U.S. citizens

Business and Republicans are one in the same. Republicans always do what business wants, and in the past thirty years there have been few, if any, examples where a majority of Republicans have voted for legislation that was contrary to business wishes. When manufacturing jobs leave the United States, a Republican businessperson is behind it and it is done with the blessing of Republican politicians.

Manufacturing jobs in the U.S. 1939 to present. Growth occurs under Democratic leadership and shrinks under Republican leadership. (Source:  Bureau of Labor Standards)

Trump’s feigned anger at businesses sending jobs overseas is almost comical if it weren’t so pitiful. In 1995, the sixty-year reign of Democratic majority control of Congress ended. in that sixty year history Democrats controlled either the House of Representatives and the Senate for all but four of those years. Republicans controlled the House of Representatives for six additional years during the Reagan administration. Since 1995, Republicans have controlled the Senate, House, or Presidency for all but two years under a banner to thwart all Democratic legislation.

Four years after the Republicans seized control of Congress and passed major business-friendly legislation, the number of manufacturing jobs in the United States began a plunge that would take it down to levels not seen in fifty years.

Job killing our country’s key employer is a primary goal of the Republican party. Federal, state, county, and local governments have been under attack since the Reagan administration. Republicans have consistently sought to strangle funding for public schools as our population has grown, eliminate jobs of the people paid to protect workers and consumers from unethical businesses, prevent funding for workers providing veteran services, and attack critical jobs that provide services for the typical citizen.

The goal of every business person is to make money, not create jobs. That is why Republicans seek to eliminate costs by killing jobs, rather than spend money to create jobs. To a business person, jobs are an expense, and are the obstacle to making money. What Republicans don’t understand is that jobs move the money through the economy, and eliminating high paying government jobs takes money out of the economy. This is why our economy is barely moving forward.

Trump supporters can’t understand the complexities of a national economy, which is why they are the problem in perpetuating Republican domination of our government. Trump is trying to push our economy into a disaster that we may never recover from unless he is stopped.

Don’t Look To The FBI To Bring Trump To Justice

24 Wednesday May 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Crime, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Conservatives, FBI, FBI Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, James Comey, L. Patrick Gray, liberals, Nixon, President Richard Nixon, Watergate

Former FBI Director James Comey: A Man For No Seasons 

FBI Director James Comey was fired by Donald Trump. Was it because he was protecting our country’s interest against an unethical, perverted, traitorous President, or did the Dark Lord have tantrum over a lack of absolute obedience?

There is little reason to believe that James Comey was prepared to act against Trump in the Russiagate investigation. Prior to being fired, Comey had declared to Congress that he believed it was perfectly acceptable to publicly announce unsubstantiated, baseless evidence against a Democratic presidential candidate just prior to an election; however, it was not acceptable to publicly announce substantiated evidence against a conservative and/or Republican prior to, or after an election.

He was correct. That is the role the FBI has historically taken, and continues today.

The FBI investigated Watergate from the moment the burglars were arrested. They had evidence that President Nixon, and his administration were involved, and yet, the FBI somehow failed to find the key evidence of a wider conspiracy that would eventually force Nixon out of office. While we don’t know the full extent of the FBI’s role in hindering the Watergate scandal, we do know the following:

  • A former FBI agent was recruited to wiretap the Democratic National Headquarters in the Watergate complex.

    Acting FBI Director L. Patrick Gray during Watergate

  • Acting FBI Director L. Patrick Gray helped destroy Watergate evidence that came from a White House safe of Howard Hunt, eleven days after the burglary.
  • On October 10, 1972, less than a month prior to the election, the FBI publicly revealed a list of crimes that their investigation had uncovered to date, and that the crimes were linked to staff in the White House. Despite this announcement, the FBI, nor Department of Justice took no action, nor threatened action, giving credibility to White House denials of the facts. Nixon won the election by a landslide, largely because Nixon and his administration were able to convince people that the FBI’s lack of action proved their innocence.

It could be reasonably argued that, in October of 1968, the FBI and the Justice Department were in a state of confusion about the depth of the Democratic National Headquarters break in, spying, eavesdropping, and cover up. It is possible that no legal action occurred before the election due to their own lack of understanding of the real situation. It could also be argued that based on the involvement of past and current members of the FBI in the Watergate break in and subsequent cover up, that the FBI was caught in an internal struggle between protecting Nixon, and not looking like they were protecting Nixon.

J. Edgar Hoover and John and Robert Kennedy

The FBI has historically been a politically motivated investigative body that has a friendly relationship with conservatives, and an adversarial relationship with liberals. The 1987, four-part mini-series, Hoover vs The Kennedys:  The Second Civil War, depicts the adversarial relationship of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover had with President Kennedy and his brother Robert.

The FBI Director role has historically been defined by a cozy relationship with conservative politicians, and an adversarial role with liberal politicians. James Comey’s replacement will likely follow that tradition.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Other Pages of This Blog

  • About Paul Kiser
  • Common Core: Are You a Good Switch or a Bad Switch?
  • Familius Interruptus: Lessons of a DNA Shocker
  • Moffat County, Colorado: The Story of Two Families
  • Rules on Comments
  • Six Things The United States Must Do
  • Why We Are Here: A 65-Year Historical Perspective of the United States

Paul’s Recent Blogs

  • Dysfunctional Social Identity & Its Impact on Society
  • Road Less Traveled: How Craig, CO Was Orphaned
  • GOP Political Syndicate Seizes CO School District
  • DNA Shock +5 Years: What I Know & Lessons Learned
  • Solstices and Sunshine In North America
  • Blindsided: End of U.S. Solar Observation Capabilities?
  • Inspiration4: A Waste of Space Exploration

Paul Kiser’s Tweets

Tweets by PaulKiser

What’s Up

March 2026
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Jun    

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 688 other subscribers

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

 

Loading Comments...