Tws's in Port Dover After Midnight

TESTING MY NEW RAIN SUIT

Looks like the weather will be warm and dry for a few weeks.  I just bought a new rain suit (maybe that explains the sudden change in weather), and so far I have been forced to test it with a garden hose.  To make the test more realistic, I sat in one of our lawn chairs and had Mary Ann spray the hose at me from the front.  She doesn't like wasting water, so she insisted that I move my lawn chair to the middle of her vegetable garden, where the runoff could do some good.  At first she was reluctant to use the full force of the hose, but as the suit seemed to hold up well, she gradually got enthusiastic with the test program.  Maybe she enjoyed it a bit too much, but at least whatever was covered with the rain suit stayed dry in that test.

A garden hose is different from rain in many ways.  On a motorcycle, the rain will be hitting you at higher speed, over a longer period of time, while the garden hose hits you with a huge amount of water at lower speeds (even on maximum force), and over a shorter period of time.  Unless you're willing to sit there and shoot water for four hours, which I'm not.

Actually, there has been a small leak on the right knee that I have been trying to seal with wax.  Although the suit has sturdy nylon material, it also has many seams, including six on each knee.  They are not double stitched, and the tape seal on the back of the stitches is kind of sloppy.  Still it's quite a small leak, so I should be able to find it and seal it one day, if I keep on with my testing.

PORT DOVER
Last night at about 10 PM I was struck with the brilliant idea of riding my bike down to Port Dover for a midnight hot chocolate and toasted cinnamon raisin bagel at Tim Hortons.  It also happens to be the 30th anniversary of a 35 hour overnight ride I made when I was 35 years old.  Except for a nearly full moon, conditions were similar.  Hot and dry during the day, clear and really cold at night.

My 2007 Vulcan 900 was ready for the trip,  and in many ways it resembles my bike from 30 years ago, a 1982 Honda Silver Wing 500.  The Vulcan has a bigger engine, but not much more horsepower.  Both are water cooled V-twins.  By coincidence, my Vulcan had no windshield last night, and neither did the Silver Wing, which turned out to be very important.  The only obvious modern technology my Vulcan had, that the Silver Wing could not match, was fuel injection.  Surprising, considering 30 years of technological advances.

I started the ride at about 10 PM, wearing only a t-shirt under my riding jacket, and kevlar pants.  But I had a secret weapon with me that I did not have on my 1983 trip to Baie Comeau for breakfast.  In my saddlebag I had my new rain suit.

I started to get cold before I reached the end of my street, so when I stopped for gas a bit later, I zippered up the front vents on my jacket.  It was still 19c and warm from the daytime sun.  But within another 15 km., the cold was increasing, so I stopped again and put on my sweat shirt.  That arrangement held me until I got to Port Dover, where I was kind of chilly, so I ordered a hot chocolate and toasted bagel.

On my return trip, the temperature was down to 16c. Out in Timmy's parking lot, I put my rain suit over everything else I was wearing. By the time I got home at 1:30 AM, I was still warm, even though wisps of fog were developing on the road.

I underestimated the cold because I'm used to riding with a windshield. Also, I am not used to riding when the temperature is dropping rapidly, like it does on a clear night in August.  Similarly, back in 1983, I had no windshield, as I had not yet bought a windshield for it.  I did soon after that overnight ride, though.

Biker Fashions For You (But not for you)

I now consider myself an expert on motorcycle fashions, having just completed my motorcycle fashion wardrobe.  (Or at least Mary Ann hopes I have completed it.)  Now is the time for me to dispense my valuable advice free of charge to the general motorcycling public.

If you have a Harley Davidson, a sportbike, a Honda GoldWing, or a BMW GS Adventure bike, and no other motorcycle, you are excused.  Not because you know everything about motorcycle fashions, but because those four types of bikes already have a complete and unique fashion wardrobe, and I cannot be of any further help to you.

This blog is for the rest of you motorcyclists, who do not have any particular style carved in stone for you and your bike.

For my non motorcycling life,  my wardrobe is minimal to sketchy.  I have one thing to wear to weddings and funerals (including my own).  Everything else is covered by one "look", basically t-shirt or sweat shirt, jeans or shorts, with some heavier outer clothing for going outside when it's colder.

For motorcycling, things get complicated. For one thing, your clothes need to perform more functions, such as crash protection, severe weather protection (basically like being in a hurricane all the time), visibility to increase chances of survival on the road, and have some resistance to road grime and oil.  Furthermore, these clothes need to match the look of your motorcycle, and look right in various social situations.

Let's start with the jacket.  The iconic black leather motorcycle jacket used have a very distinct tough guy image, which it has kept, but diminished over the years as it was adopted by high school girls and non-motorcycling people of alternate sexual preferences.  In modern language, the black leather jacket has been "nerfed" or rendered less threatening than it used to be in the early sixties.

What does a motorcyclist do if they want to recapture that "tough guy" image in the 21st century?  I suggest a black hoodie. It can be worn with a black leather jacket, or any other kind of jacket.  And nothing says "just shoot me Mr. Vigilante" like a black hoodie.  Oddly, the hoodie also has a nerd-like quality, as you can see on "The Big Bang Theory" where Leonard wear one all the time.  I think the connection between the hoodie, the geeks and the bad guys is through the Emperor Palpatine of Star Wars, who always wears a black hood, and is very evil, and throws lightning bolts from his fingers.

The hoodie is a great motorcycle accessory for all bikers who need fashion advice, and even for Harley riders, as it is also available with the Harley Logo on it.  It works with old bikes, and new.  With metric cruisers, dirt bikes, even scooters.  The only situation where it may not work is in a heavy rainstorm, where it will capture cold water and funnel it down your neck.

Now that I have taken care of the all important "bad boy" image, lets look at survival.  A reflective safety vest will effectively cancel out any bad boy image you may have, so is it worth wearing from a fashion viewpoint?  I would say yes, if you are riding a vintage motorcycle, or a scooter, or if you are not going to a hard core biker rally like Friday 13th in Port Dover.  Actually even in Port Dover, the reflective vest would not be a fashion faux pas, compared to the nude guy with the bunny ears.

Next in the survival category is the helmet, but it may be even more important than a reflective vest.  For a big bike, or a bike that goes on the freeway, a full face helmet is the standard.  For trips around town, or for looking tough, a half helmet may look best.  Unfortunately, it is not as safe, but here we are talking about image.  It's up to you whether image is worth it, but apparently some helmets are now sold in Ontario that only meet DOT standards (not Canadian Standards), and some of them are clearly not safe, because apparently DOT does not test helmets.  But it really seems like some lawmakers don't care much about actual safety, because they have also allowed exceptions to the helmet law for religious purposes in BC and Manitoba, and maybe one day in Ontario.  So of you are a practicing member of a recognized religion that forbids wearing motorcycle helmets, you can really look tough wearing anything your gods will allow.

Now for footwear.  Black leather boots are best, but try to avoid over junkified boots with redundant straps and shiny buckles. Other colors such as yellow/tan workboots are OK, but if you have an old leaky bike they are going to end up black anyway from oil gushing from every gasket.  Stay with a simple Doc Martin style or military style, and you'll look OK no matter what type of bike you ride except for motocross.  Back in the seventies, I used to think cowboy boots were acceptable as motorcycle boots, but now I think lace-up styles are better because they are easier to get on and off and stay on better in a crash.  You just have to make sure to tuck in the laces so they don't get hooked up an any part of the bike.

Picture: Kitten with a hoodie.  When wearing this on the motorcycle, the jacket goes over the hoodie, but the hood itself is folded down outside the jacket.  It must be folded down, as it should not be worn under the helmet.

Shopping for Rain Pants, I Buy a 2 Piece Rain Suit

After getting caught in a couple of downpours this year, I discovered that my rain outfit is not as good as I thought it was.  I have several rainpants, but none of them really suit me any more.  For one thing, my Vulcan 900 does not have lower leg shields, and that puts extra burden on the pants to keep the rain out.  Also, my new motorcycle boots are bigger (size 12), and have large soles that are hard to push through leg openings.  Finally, I am not as limber as I used to be when I bought some of these pants, and I often strain a muscle while dancing around trying to insert my second foot.  (The Lost Motorcyclist was 45 when he (I) bought one of these pairs of pants, and now I'm 65).

I have three pairs of rainpants. I have my 20 year old rainpants that are waterproof, and non-breathable, but I can't get them on easily.  Then I have a pair of Coleman walking pants, fairly easy to get on, but breathable and therefore not very waterproof when riding on my Vulcan 900.  Finally I have some Belstaff cold weather pants that are sort of waterproof, really easy to get on with a full length zipper, but bulky and hot for summer riding.

After looking about on the Internet, I realized that the only way to buy a new pair of rainpants would be to visit a store and try to get into a pair, while wearing my motorcycle boots.  Lately I have had some luck finding quality gear at low prices at the Tri-city Cycle Clearance centre, in "The Southworks" in Cambridge.  So I put on my normal summer touring gear, including the size 12 boots, and went to try on some rain pants.

The only rain pants they had were part of a package, either a one piece suit or a two piece suit.  At $67, the price of the suits was about the same as I might pay for a good quality rainpant alone somewhere else. And I already saw on Google, that it was not so easy to find good quality, separate rainpants for motorcycling.

The first suit I tried on was a one-piece Bering suit, and I tried the largest they had in the store, which was size L.  Although I managed to get my feet in (a bit of a struggle), I simply could not get the top of the one-piece suit over my motorcycle jacket without help.  Next I tried a camo two-piece suit that looked pretty cheap, with no nylon liner. Struggling to get my second leg in, I strained a muscle, which disqualified that suit.  My last try was a Nexgen XXXL suit, which I managed to get on without too much difficulty.  (Although the leg zipper is short, and the boots kind of stick to the mesh liner and try to drag it inside out.)   As I was getting tired, I did not press on with the shopping.  I simply took an XXXL silver-grey/black/orange combination that actually would look very good if it wasn't for the size.  In a XXXL size, I kind of look like I'm wearing a balloon shaped poncho.  But at least I don't look fat in it.  I will make the observation that Nexgen makes these suits in sizes up to XXXXXL. The XXXL is big enough that no one could really guess how big I might be in there.  Other than the gigantic size, the only thing that bothers me is how bulky the suit is for packing.  It's made of thick textile, with a liner, and the jacket and pants together fill up more than half my left saddlebag.  I have only done one road test so far, and all I know is that the legs begin to flap strongly at about 120 kph.

Now to wait for the next rainy day and take a ride on the 401.  If the suit is really, really good, it might scare away the rain and start a new round of droughts for southern Ontario.

Picture: The Nexgen 2-piece rain suit with suspenders, pockets, a liner, and a high collar with built in under-helmet hood.  Waterproof/rain prevention qualities as yet unknown.

Conservative Theory that Trudeau is Going for the Stoner Vote

I began to read this opinion piece online from the "Star Phoenix", and before the first paragraph was done, I was already getting that "right wing nutjob" vibe from the author, Les MacPherson.

I didn't know this until I checked the internet, but yes, the Saskatoon Star Phoenix is owned by the same group as the right wing National Post.  So there is a good chance this is purposeful conservative propaganda.

Breaking down the article to its basic arguments and assumptions:

- Justin Trudeau (Liberal Leader) is promising to legalize pot in order to capture the all important stoner vote.

- Stoners will hate legalization, (if it happens) as government meddling will make pot more expensive and less appealing.

- Dealers will hate legalization, as they will be put out of business by excessive government regulation and taxing.

- Trudeau will not legalize marijuana anyway, he is only lying.  Hypocritical liberal governments do more marijuana busts than conservative governments.

- Conclusion: Trudeau should wait until the US legalizes marijuana before doing anything.

- Recommendation (implied): Don't vote for Trudeau, as he is a hypocrite and a Socialist, (if that is not too redundant)


Seems like an inoffensive article, but there are some underlying right-wing assumptions that I do not accept.

- The negative stereotyping and use of the pejorative name stoner.  Why are conservatives always stereotyping people????  OOOPS now I'm stereotyping.  Anyway, it's true.

- The assumption that all the people who want marijuana legalized are stoners, and only stoners want marijuana legalized.  That is not true, as many "non-stoners" believe that decriminalizing marijuana will boost our economy.  (a non-stoner is the opposite of what a stoner is supposed to be in this article, I have no other definition for it).

- The assumption that if the government gets involved in the marijuana business, things will fall apart.  This is dumb, even from a conservative free market point of view.  OK, we need a short lesson in right wing free enterprise.  ILLEGAL activities are not free enterprise.  LEGAL activities are not automatically "government run". By Les MacPherson's logic, black market gasoline would be cheaper and more potent than legal pump gas. I don't think so.

- Les's conclusion is typical of your basic Canadian Conservative:  Wait until the US does it, on the assumption that, except for Obama, the US is always right.

Getting Caught in the Rain on a Motorcycle

I admit that I am not the expert in staying dry, I do not live in British Columbia or England.  But in some ways it is more difficult to stay dry when rain is unexpected.  My first experience with rain riding was extremely shocking.  I had been riding a motorcycle for five months by the time May 1970 came around.   It was my first year in West Africa, where there is a rainy season and a dry season each year. For five months, I had been riding my motorcycle all over the country without any concern for rain, or even cold.

The day I first experienced rain on a motorcycle started out like many others.  I was at the beach for the weekend, and travelling the 200 km. back to my home on a nice Sunday afternoon in May.  About 30 km from home, a sudden thunderstorm came up.  I was wearing a helmet, sunglasses, T-shirt, regular shoes and jeans.  No face shield or windshield, no gloves.  No spare clothes, and of course no rain suit. I had not seen a drop of rain for about six months, and the temperature had been 31 degrees every day.  And, as I said before, I had never in my life ridden a motorcycle in rain.

The first drops of rain that hit me were a big surprise.  It was like being hit by rocks!  I thought about it for a short while.  Was this hail?  No, it was just raindrops.  I slowed down, and that was a bit less painful.  Within a few minutes, the rain was coming down very heavily, and I was soaked completely through and through.  Then the gravel road started to fill up with puddles.  Every puddle almost blasted my feet off the footpegs with the spray. It wasn't too long before the road started to get muddy, and the mud started getting slippery.  Luckily it was a short storm, and within about 20 minutes the sun was out again.  The temperature felt like it had dipped to about 70 degrees during the storm.  Then within another 20 minutes, I was almost totally dry, or at least comfortable again.  Just wondering what had hit me back there.

Unlike Canada, most of the time in Sierra Leone, they didn't bother with the weather reports. For half the year this would be the daily weather report, if they bothered with it at all.  Sun will come up at 6 AM, sunny, high of 92, sun will go down at 6 PM.  For the other half of the year, it would be:  Sun will come up at 6 AM, sunny with afternoon/evening thunderstorms, high of 82, sun will go down at 6 PM.

Many years later, riding in the summer in southern Ontario to me is mostly like being in a dry season.  This year has had more rain than usual, and quite heavy at times.  So how do you prepare for this kind of rain?  I have a windshield and splash guards for my feet.  I usually bring a rain jacket, rain pants, rain mitts, and boot covers with me.  Then I use my smart phone to check the weather radar, so that I know when to put on the rain suit.

A couple of days ago, I was on the 401 and I knew an intense rain storm was coming towards me.  So I stopped early, while it was still dry and put on my rain pants and jacket.  I don't bother with the rain mitts or boot covers.  Right where I expected it, the rain started, and it was really intense, some cars were pulling over. But my visibility was good, so I kept going, and I was only 15 minutes from my destination.  At my Mother's house I had a spare set of clothes if I needed them.

In the rainstorm, the first breach of the defences was my neck.  I had made the mistake of wearing a hoodie under my rain jacket.  The hood was sticking out, and apparently wicking cold water into my jacket.  About ten minutes later, I started to feel cold water from the front zipper area reaching my crotch.  When I got in the house, I changed my clothes and found out that my pant legs were half wet because of the "breathable" rain pants flapping too much.  Also my socks were damp, but this was actually better than I expected, as in a previous rainstorm, my boots had actually filled with water.  These lace-up boots are not advertised as waterproof, but they work surprisingly well as long as water does not run down my leg into the boots.  My T-shirt was mostly dry except for the lower front.  My gloves were completely soaked, but at least no black dye had run out to colour my hands.  And overall I was warm enough, because of the time of year, even though I was a bit wet.

But I have now changed my breathable rain pants to old fashioned PVC.  And next time, no cotton hoodie will be sticking out in the rain.  Always striving to do better.

I Think We All Know Why Obama Flubs Geography

I was reading about Sun News * fighting for status as a legitimate "news" channel.  In one of the comments, claiming that the liberal news was also biased, an example was given where the liberal news covered up for Obama's latest gaffe.

Apparently, on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Obama had said that various Atlantic seaports were on the Gulf of Mexico.  Is it possible that Obama has so little knowledge of US geography?  After all, I watched the show, and I did not notice any gaffe of that type.  But according to right wing sources, (Michelle Malkin) this gaffe was as big as the famous one where Republican Vice President Dan Quail said potato was spelled potatoe.
Let's compare the two gaffes.

Obama was naming places where deepening is needed, to me it means ports all along the Gulf *and* places like Charleston and Savannah.  He did not write "ports all along the Gulf  (places like Charleston, South Carolina, or Savannah, Georgia, or Jacksonville, Florida)."  Punctuation is important, especially when you are adjusting it to suit your propaganda purposes.

What kind of person will not only call this an example of Obama's ignorance, but also an example of Liberal left wing bias. I guess it's the same kind of person who will pretend there is actually a dash before and after  "places like...." instead of  commas.  And then say

"The only conceivable way to interpret what Obama actually said is that the ports of Charleston, Savannah, and Jacksonville are "along the Gulf" of Mexico. Of course, these ports are really on the Atlantic Ocean."

This text was not given in writing, it was in a live interview.  I heard a comma, I guess some nitpicker heard dashes, or some might have heard parentheses.  I already knew where these ports were, so it seems I was biased into hearing the commas.

In the video of Dan Quail, a student is spelling potato on the blackboard.  Dan Quail jumps in and tells the student he is wrong, and he needs to add an "E" to the end of the word.

One is actually the definition of an embarassing gaffe, the other is a deliberate misunderstanding by a hostile  commentator.  Apparently right wing "news" organizations like Fox and Sun News do not see the difference.  That's why I do not consider them to be genuine news.  They are too biased.  That is "the only conceivable way to interpret" their ignorant arguments.

Next time, Obama should have two versions of the statement, one for liberals who know geography, and the other one for right wingers who need a map and some red arrows pointing to all the ports.

* Sun News is a Canadian TV "news" station that is similar to the U.S. Fox "News".  And for those who don't know what Fox News is, it is a network news channel that claims to be "Fair and Balanced" but also claims to be the voice of the right wing conservatives and Republicans, counteracting what they call the left wing liberal bias of the mainstream press.  Sun News and right wing backers have so far been blocked in Canada in two attempts. One, to eliminate the restrictions on false and misleading  information in the news.  And second to force Sun News onto all basic cable channels free of charge, claiming status as an independent genuine news organization.

Genesis of a Shade Tree Mechanic

A shade tree mechanic can be defined in two ways

1. A person willing to perform repairs and maintenance on their own vehicle, usually with only a tree for shade and a small portable tool kit.

2. A person who, while trying to fix their vehicle, causes more harm than good.


I have described myself as a shade tree mechanic for almost 44 years now, since my first tune up job on my first bike.  I was reminded of that today, when I did a valve and timing adjustment on my red 1969 Honda CD175.  The first tune up I did was early January 1970, about 44 years ago.  It was also under a shade tree, like today, and also performed on the same year and model of motorcycle.  The main difference was that in 1970, I had never done anything like it before.  Also, then, I was 200 km from my home, which at the time was in Sierra Leone, West Africa.  And I had only the as-yet-unused tool kit from the new bike, and the owners manual, which included two small pages on how to perform these adjustments. If I screwed up in any way, I was quite far up s-h-double hockey sticks creek.

In early January 1970 was attending a workshop at Milton Margai Teachers College in Goderich, Sierra Leone.  The college dorms were right near the beach.  I had travelled to the conference with my new bike.  And while I was there, the odometer read 480 miles, and according to the book I had to do a tune-up.  Being a bookish person, I could not imagine waiting until I got home, when it would be reading over 500 miles.  So as everyone else left by taxi and bus and lorry, I moved my bike under a nearby shade tree, overlooking the beach, and got my tool kit and owners manual out.

The setting was about as idyllic as anyone could imaging.  I didn't take any pictures, as my camera got broken as a result of a poor packing job on my new bike.  But I have attempted a photo-shopped picture, showing a tree and a similar bike together, with a similar beach in the background.

I took stuff apart, following the directions in the owners manual. All the tools were included, even the .002" feeler gauge.  It probably took an hour, and when I put it all back together, the bike started right up.  To say I was relieved would be an understatement.  It would be accurate to call this a life altering moment.  I know people misuse this term all the time, but this was the real deal. I was 21, and after pretty much a lifetime of going to school and generally mucking about, for the first time I found out that I could actually do something real.  Anyway, I thought it was real, and that's what counts.

Ride It To Port Dover Like You Stole It.

I have heard this strange expression "Ride it like you stole it".  Today I tried to  figure out what it means.  I assume the scenario is this: you  come across a random motorcycle with the key in it, jump aboard and take off without doing the 12 point pre-run safety inspection.  Due to the spontaneous nature of the ride, you also do not take the gear you will need, like a full water bottle, a rain suit, and a tool kit.  Of course, you do not perform a tune-up on the stolen bike before firing it up, nor do you add air to the tires.  Then you ride mostly at top speed without regard to engine longevity, or safety.

Another thing you would not do, if you were stealing the bike, is plan out a circular scenic route, ending up back where you started.  But actually, I did just that.  I left Kitchener and headed for Ancaster first, on my way to Lake Erie, then back home.  Just before Ancaster I went on Weir Road and Sulphur Springs Road.  These are good roads for a reckless rider on a Honda CD175, as they have hairpins and some gravel sections.  And if I dump the CD175, who cares?

What kind of clothes does a bike thief wear?  I would expect a bandanna to hide your face, and a black hoodie sweatshirt.  Probably not a construction worker's safety vest, but then again, I might do that just because who would ever expect a person in a safety vest to be stealing a motorcycle?  It's the perfect disguise.

Just before I got to Ancaster, I missed a turn and ended up across the street from a corn maze.  The sight on the ground was nothing much, but while  was checking out my location on Google maps, I saw this pattern across the street from the overhead satellite view.

https://maps.google.ca/?ll=43.289186,-80.026925&spn=0.005748,0.01929&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=43.287866,-80.027903&panoid=paU3ml4NhsVoL3IlLiyZPQ&cbp=11,359.52,,2,4.4

After getting back on track with Google maps, I headed for the bridge over the Grand River at Cayuga, and soon after, took Kohler Road down to pick up the scenic Lakeside Trail heading for Port Dover.  This is not a walking trail, it is a car trail.  There are signs along the way to keep you on track without having to stop and use your i-phone at every turn.

At Port Dover, it was time to eat, but there was no parking left at Tim Horton's.  Instead I stopped at Willy's for a Willy Burger, fries and a Coke. Normally, I should be looking for a nice healthy meal, but a guy who was worried about healthy food would not be stealing bikes, would he?  Also, there was a free motorcycle parking spot nearby, where I could hide the hot bike among all the Harleys outside Clare's Harley Davidson Shop.  Unfortunately the 44 year-old Honda 175 managed to called some attention to itself even in that crowd of shiny hogs.  After my meal on Willy's patio, I was ready to head home. I slowly put my helmet and safety vest on, then backed up and started jumping on the tiny kick starter.  When I turned around, I saw a crowd of Harley riders gathered around me.  I guess they had never seen a kick starter or a stolen bike before.  So I got going before anybody decided to call the fuzz.

First Photo: Sulphur Springs Road.  Second photo: Bike thief from "Bike Locking Tips" at MotorcycleCruiser.com

http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/accessoriesandgear/0905_crup_bike_locking_tips/

End of World Scenarios are Multiplying

Would you believe this could end the human race?

This was a headline that I spotted this morning:  "Could This End the Human Race?"  Are you guessing I was watching Fox News? No, that was The Weather Channel.  Were they referring to global warming?  Of course not, commercial media have gone silent now for several years about global warming.  They were referring to a solar flare, which they were calling a solar tornado.  And, according to the video presenter, Matt Sampson of weather.com, if this solar flare erupted on Earth, it could wipe out the human race.

http://www.weather.com/video/could-this-end-the-human-race-37304

It seems that no exaggeration is too great any more in the quest for attention grabbing headlines.  Especially on the internet, where mouse clicks result in advertising revenue. As you might expect, when you click this headline you first get a short advertisement just before you find out if the human race is really about to be wiped out. In my case, the ad was about making sure your dog is emotionally healthy.  Of course my dog is emotionally healthy, he does not read headlines like "Could This Wipe Out the Entire Shit-zu Race?" before his first coffee of the morning.

Now lets get back to reality for a second, just in case you were worried, too. A solar tornado cannot happen on Earth, for many reasons.  I will not bother to explain all of them, but suffice it to say that if the surface of planet Earth was like the normal, average surface of the sun, for only ten minutes,  with or without the solar "tornado", all life on earth (not just the human race) would also be wiped out.

Underneath the video are buttons for viewers to express their reaction.  You can choose from  A. Unbelievable B. Terrifying C. Crazy.  Apparently you are not allowed to choose D. "Are you kidding me?"

What bothers me the most about these headlines is that we have now seen from years of surveys, that about 18% of people believe anything they see on TV, newspapers or the internet.  That 18% is the irreducible stupidity element, or I.S.E., and that percent is big enough to swing elections.  It is also big enough to hamper our education system, clog our justice system, water down our health care system, and create mayhem with our traffic system.  They should not be encouraged.

Here is another result for my search for "End of the Human Race".  It's Montana Steam Power Co, that provides emergency electric generators in case the grid goes down, which as they say, will also result in the end of the human race. Unless somebody buys one of these steam generators.

http://www.montanasteampower.com/

Picture: It's pretty obvious that a robot uprising is more likely to wipe out the human race than either of the first two alternatives.
http://news.mindprocessors.com/technology-news/risk-of-robot-uprising-wiping-out-human-race-to-be-studied/

Were Humans Used in Nutritional Experiments in the1940's?

On the CBC news this morning, I heard a newscaster make some disturbing allegations.  Apparently, nutritional researchers withheld food from hungry aboriginal children in residential schools in Canada, in order to study the effects of malnutrition.

I had already heard about the previous scandal, an experiment where researchers apparently gave vitamin and mineral supplements to some, but not all aboriginal schoolchildren.  To me, that did not seem as bad as withholding food from starving children.

I am not trying to make excuses for things that were done a long time ago.  I understand there was a lot more racism back then, in fact there is still a lot today, but at least it is not as overt.  There was also a different attitude towards corporal punishment of children.  We don't have the death penalty in Canada today, but we did then.  Experiments used to be performed on human beings, not just aboriginals either.  Check out Donald Ewen Cameron on Wikipedia, doing experiments with shock therapy and drugs, resulting in death of human test subjects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Ewen_Cameron

So it seems the ethical aspect of human experiments has come a long way since the fifties, in that we are much more careful about obtaining "Consent" of the subjects, and when we finally do the experiments, it is done with proper procedures and documentation, ensuring that we actually get some scientific benefit from the experiment.

Here is what the "Idle No More" (an Aboriginal activist) website posted about the situation, as quoted from the Canadian Press, under the title "HUNGRY ABORIGINAL PEOPLE USED IN BUREAUCRATS' EXPERIMENTS".  This title appears also on the CBC website, and many others.

http://www.idlenomore.ca/hungry_aboriginal_people_used_in_bureaucrats_experiments

If they withheld food from half of a group of starving children do see if they would die faster than a control group that got the regular rations, then that was evil by any standard.

If they gave minerals and vitamin supplements unknowingly to half the group, to see if there were any benefits to their health or mental states, without cutting back in any way on the food they were getting already, then the bureacrats and researchers were not evil, they were simply not acting according to modern standards on human research.

From the article above:

"The first experiment began in 1942 on 300 Norway House Cree. Of that group, 125 were selected to receive vitamin supplements which were withheld from the rest.
At the time, researchers calculated the local people were living on less than 1,500 calories a day. Normal, healthy adults generally require at least 2,000."

According to this, all the natives in some communities were basically going hungry, not just the children in residential schools. Instead of providing more food to the communities, the researchers gave selected people vitamin supplements.  If all the natives were hungry, that brings up many other questions about how they were fed, who was responsible for feeding them, and why were they not hunting/fishing/gathering berries, or otherwise using traditional sources of food?  None of that was mentioned in the article, although it seems familiar, just from Canadian and US history, and movies.

Here is another quote:

"One school deliberately held milk rations for two years to less than half the recommended amount to get a 'baseline' reading for when the allowance was increased."

If true, it would surely be a criminal act, even by the loose standards of 1947. But, I notice it does not say the rations were "cut", only "held".  Does that mean it was already normal practice to give half the recommended amount of milk?  Why?  Who set the recommended amount in the first place?

"At another, children were divided into one group that received vitamin, iron and iodine supplements and one that didn't."

Sounds reasonable for 1947.

"One school depressed levels of vitamin B1 to create another baseline before levels were boosted."

Did people know what vitamin B1 was in 1947?  If so how was the level depressed, by withholding food?  Was it in pill form?

"A special enriched flour that couldn't legally be sold elsewhere in Canada under food adulteration laws was used on children at another school."

This actually doesn't sound too evil, as I think we now basically use enriched flour everywhere and think nothing of it. It is your basic white  "Wonder Bread".  Of course if the illegal enriched flour had proven fatal, that would have been a bad thing.

"Many dental services were withdrawn from participating schools during that time. Gum health was an important measuring tool for scientists and they didn't want treatments on children's teeth distorting results."

If true, that is a crime, unless the treatments that were being withheld were also experimental.  In which case it's the opposite of a crime.  The actual treatments that were withheld are not specified.

"They knew from the beginning that the real problem and the cause of malnutrition was underfunding. That was established before the studies even started and when the studies were completed that was still the problem."

Studies in nutrition are not simple, because even when people have enough money and access to food, they can still be malnourished.  You need to have a healthy balanced diet, and not all people understand what a healthy diet is, or want to eat it.  You can be obese and still  suffer from nutritional deficiencies.  You cannot drink Coke and eat potato chips your whole life without serious side effects, not that I am suggesting anyone in 1947 would do that.  But you also cannot easily force people to eat a healthy diet.

Was Slavery Allowed in the Bible?

If you travel around the USA, you may come across a billboard like the picture to the left.  And you may wonder, why are they still arguing about slavery and about the bible being God's word?  It could be a legacy from the time of slavery.  The situation, (maybe oversimplified) is that today, there is a sizeable part of the USA that believes in the bible as the literal word of God. Others believe we need to interpret the bible for a modern world.  (Or don't believe it at all)

To anyone who looks further into the debate about the bible, it seems like the strongest support for the literal interpretation of the bible comes from the Southern Confederate states in the civil war.  Did the civil war have anything to do with this split on how the bible is interpreted?

I found this in Wikipedia: "Religious conflict over the slavery question"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War#Religious_conflict_over_the_slavery_question

Before the Civil War, most Americans held the belief that the bible was literally true. According to the proslavery side, was written in the bible that white people should enslave the black people.

The slavery debate raged on with each side combing through the bible for passages that supported their cause.  The pro-slavery side won the technical debate by a landslide.  Apparently there are a lot of passages in the bible supporting slavery, and almost none to refute it. So the literal interpretation of the Bible actually does support slavery. The reference given in Wikipedia is a book by Mark Noll, "America's God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. (2002)"  I don't have the book, but apparently it explains how the bible debate was won by the pro-slavery faction.  But the abolitionists felt in their hearts that slavery was wrong anyway.

The book "Slavery and Sin: The Fight Against Slavery and the Rise of Liberal Protestantism" By Molly Oshatz has some words about the debate on p 61:

"Christian abolitionists ... endeavored to make the case that the bible did not in fact sanction slavery, an argument that proslavery exegetes quickly dismantled... The most persuasive antislavery moderate of all, Harriet Beecher Stowe, avoided biblical argument in favour of narrative." 

If it is true that a literal interpretation of the bible supports slavery, where does that leave bible literalists?  Today slavery is seen as an evil. Even the Southern Baptists have officially apologized for supporting slavery.  The only concession by literalists seems to be that the word slave was mistranslated.  If an important word like slave could be mistranslated (I don't think it was, but anyway...), what else could be mistranslated?

Before the war, three major branches of American Protestantism split into north and south versions because of their interpretation of God's will on slavery. The Methodists in 1844, the Baptists in 1845, and the Presbyterians in 1857.  The southern versions of these Churches could insist on an even stricter literal interpretation of the bible, while the northern branches had to use a more liberal interpretation of the bible, to support their view that slavery was wrong.  The Northern churches could begin to acknowledge that the Bible was written more for the ancient desert people than it was for 19th century America.

The debate that could have been settled by reading of the bible, ended up in a shooting war, with hundreds of thousands of Americans killed.  But even though the north won the war, southerners apparently remained convinced that the bible was literally true, while eventually conceding that slavery was wrong.  And that is about where we are today, with the bible literalists now attacking Darwinists and homosexuals instead of Abolitionists.  Hopefully this time it will not be resolved with guns.

Biker's Guide to Cobourg, Ontario

Yesterday Mary Ann and I visited Cobourg Ontario. Cobourg is a small town on Lake Ontario.  It has a spectacular old town hall, and a historic district with several buildings that look like they were put up in the 1800's.  It is also on the beach, and even has a campground right on the beach. With all the outdoor cafes, it is my favourite kind of town to visit.  We both went on my Kawasaki Vulcan 900.

In theory, we live only two hours away from Cobourg, but we had never been there before.  That's because Cobourg is on the other (east) side of Toronto.  There is no easy way to get through Toronto, so if I want to just go for a drive and visit some random town, it will be one that is west of Toronto.  After living in Kitchener for 33 years, I know south western Ontario quite well, but south eastern Ontario is unexplored territory. The only way to cross Toronto is either the 401 or the 407. The 401 is up to 12 lanes of insane drivers stuck in senseless traffic jams that go on for miles.  The 407 is a less frantic alternative, but it is toll road, and oddly ends nowhere.

We chose to visit Cobourg because we went to see some people who live there. We also got to see a beach volleyball tournament, and the annual Great Pine Ridge classic car show.  I was amazed by the number of restored cars I had not seen before.  Our hosts had an old Commer camper van entered in the show.  Here is a link to the show, and an entry on Wikipedia for Commer in case you have never heard of this old British manufacturer.

http://acccc.ca/home/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=66

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commer

I didn't have my camera, but there are a lot of great pictures of Cobourg here
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=205642

The weather forecast for the entire day was 50% chance of precipitation, in isolated thunderstorms.  So I brought along my good luck charm against thunderstorms, the smartphone with weather radar on it.  Despite all the wet weather we have had this year, so far I have not driven into a heavy rain storm.  The drive to Cobourg in the morning had no traffic jams, and no rain.  Apparently about half the vintage cars skipped the show because of the threat of rain.  It didn't matter to me, as approximately one hundred cars did show up.  With Mary Ann, who can take or leave old cars, (mostly leave actually), and other things to do like beach volleyball, visiting the marina, and reading historical plaques in downtown Cobourg, the extra cars were not missed.

We left at 8 PM for the ride back to Kitchener.  There were three problems.  It was getting dark, there were isolated rain storms around, and the traffic would be much worse.  In Toronto, we got stuck in a half hour long traffic jam when some rain started.  But we still were reasonably dry, even without putting on our rain outfits.  I guess with the windshield, the clothes I was wearing were kind of water resistant.  When we finally got out of Toronto, I wanted to stop and check the weather radar, but I missed our first opportunity, which is Milton. The next place to check the radar would be Morriston, but before Morriston my luck ran out and went through the middle of a heavy rainstorm.  It is bad to get a lot of rain at night, on a freeway, riding a motorcycle, without proper rain gear on. We were doing all those things. By the time we reached Morriston my boots were filled with water and I was leaving a trail of wet footprints wherever I walked.  The rest of me wasn't too wet, even though I forgot to close the vents on my jacket.  It was cold in Tim Hortons, but warm enough outside on the road.  When I finally checked the radar, the rain had passed, so I zipped up my vents, put on the wet gloves, and was home by midnight.  The gear is still drying out.

It will probably be quite a while before we visit the unknown side of Ontario again. South Eastern Ontario is a great place to go motorcycling, probably a great place to live, but Toronto remains a formidable barrier for us western people.

Picture: A CL16 sailing in front of Cobourg marina.  I saw lots of CL16s at the sailing club. I got the picture here:
http://lucparent.wordpress.com/page/2/

Justin Carter: A Psychoanalysis

Which one is just kidding?

Justin Carter, a 19 year old male in Texas, made this comment on the internet:

"Oh yeah, I'm real messed up in the head, I'm going to go shoot up a school full of kids and eat their still, beating hearts"

This was followed by LOL, and JK, which as everyone knows means Laughing out loud and just kidding.

So a Canadian woman spotted this, and alerted authorities in Texas, who put Justin in Jail and he is still there, awaiting trial and in solitary confinement, four months later.

Following some of the discussion on the internet, I notice a trend for left wingers and right wingers to each blame the other for this incarceration.

It starts with Texas, a well known right wing state, and the location of this debacle.  So you might think that this is the typical right wing Texas justice, famous for executions and harshness.  But no, apparently this is in Austin Texas, and the crime is a Federal crime.  Austin is the left wing stronghold of Texas, and of course Obama is president of the Federal government, so it's all his fault.  But actually that is partly a lie too, because the court that set the bail of $500,000 is not a federal court, and is not even in Austin. It is in New Braunfels, Texas. Not only is New Braunfels closer to San Antonio than to Austin, it is a German community like my home town of Kitchener (The Lost Motorcyclist lives in Kitchener, Ontario).  From the New Braunfels web page:

"Willkommen! to a little bit of old Germany smack dab in the middle of the Texas Hill Country. New Braunfels is the kind of old-fashioned town that makes folks feel right at home."

The court that set the bail for Justin, and delayed his trial, and the jailers who put him in solitary confinement, are not directly under federal jurisdiction.  While it is a federal law that has been violated, I'm not so sure Obama or the Lefties take all the responsibility for a law against uttering terrorist threats.

But of course, stupidity does not stop there: check this out, from a blog named "Small dead animals"

http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/free-justin-car.html

"The woman who called police about this "threat" should undergo some intense involuntary re-education in recognizing sarcasm and satire. A couple of years of "re-education" would likely be appropriate."  by Loki, July 1, 2013

Well, it seems to me that arresting Justin is only the tip of the iceberg of stupidity.  I mean: An ordinary citizen notifies the police of a threat to shoot kindergarten kids, and the concerned citizen should be locked up for two years? In my opinion, the concerned citizen has really done nothing wrong, and everything right. She is not responsible for any of the 4 month detention or harsh conditions in the jail.  She does not even really understand the Texan judicial system, as she comes from Canada and may not have watched "Thelma and Louise".

Although we cannot prevent any given person (either Justin or Loki) from being stupid, society's response to stupidity should be rational. After investigating Justin Carter, and seeing there was no credible threat, the police should have released him.  Then nobody needs to get their knickers in a twist until Justin actually goes into a school armed to the teeth and kills twenty kids just before killing himself.  And what is the probability of that happening? 1% maybe?  And I base that 1% entirely on the fact that Justin was stupid enough to make that comment, in response to some online friend saying he was crazy.  Otherwise I would say effectively 0%.

Now for Doctor Lost's (me) official psychoanalysis of the situation.  Justin seems to have a style of communicating that does not mesh well with reality.  I don't know the full context of how his crazy conversation got started, but let me guess that Justin said many crazy things online, prompting one of his gaming buddies to comment on the fact that he seemed "messed up in the head".  To which Justin gave his classic answer "Oh yeah, I'm real messed up in the head, I'm going to go shoot up a school full of kids and eat their still, beating hearts".  Now that response indicates a person who has a tendency to answers that make him look even crazier than was originally thought.  If this is Justin's shtick, (i.e. he does it all the time) then what response did the police officers get when they questioned him about his online comment?  I'm guessing Justin was not aware of his own condition, and unknowingly continued with his sarcasm until the authorities finally decided to lock him up.  "Tourett's syndrome" is a disorder where a person cannot help swearing inappropriately.  I imagine there is another as-yet-undiscovered syndrome where a person cannot help getting themselves in deeper trouble with sarcastic comments, I will now name it "The Cousin Vinnie Syndrome" after a movie by the name of "My Cousin Vinnie".  And I think Justin Carter probably has it real bad.

Picture: The guy in the orange wig was not "just kidding" (allegedly).

Book Review of Hominids by Robert J. Sawyer

Robert Sawyer is a Canadian science fiction write and despite his having written 21 books, I never heard of him before.  And I thought I liked science fiction books.  Most amazingly, I had to find out about him through Mary Ann. She, who dislikes science fiction, was in the middle of reading this book when I found it on the table.  Somehow I lost Mary Ann's place marker in my rush to finish the book.  She chose it because it was the Waterloo selection for "One Book One Community" for 2005.

http://oboc.ca/past-years/hominids/

I won't get into the plot of the book, so this review will not contain any spoilers.  There is a comparison between the world we live in, where Neanderthals are extinct, and a parallel universe where Neanderthals became the only sentient species, and Homo Sapiens went extinct instead.  It seems to me that Sawyer comes up with a lot of ideas about how Neanderthal civilization might have evolved, based on his research, or his knowledge of our own history and science.  For example, he writes that if humans had not been warlike, we might never have reached the moon, as those rockets were originally invented as a weapon of war.  How would technology evolve if we did not use fossil fuels?  These are all interesting questions from a scientific viewpoint. Additionally, Robert Sawyer tackles religion and philosophy.  How would a society evolve that did not believe in a father-figure God who punishes and rewards us in the afterlife?

There was one topic in the book, that was particularly timely, about surveillance.  In the Neanderthal world, everyone's actions are recorded all the time by implanted devices.  There is no privacy, but hardly any crime either.  This topic foreshadows the current 2013 scandal where we find out that the NSA is recording all kinds of phone calls and emails.  Similarly to what happened in "Hominids", NSA is not necessarily looking or listening to all these recorded messages, but in case of a crime, can go back to see what happened.

In the political climate of today, Robert Sawyer comes off as extremely left wing liberal. This book will insult many conservative readers,  who have tired of hearing about everything that is wrong with our warlike, environment destroying species.  In fact the book already has insulted many, judging from comments on this website.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/264946.Hominids


To me (the Lost Motorcyclist), who is now officially a 60's liberal, "Hominids" reads like a science fiction story from the fifties, except with bit more sex, as censorship has loosened over the years.  In other words, the book's philosophical underpinning is science, reason, peace and tolerance.  I have this feeling that some of modern science fiction has been replaced by religious, magical, and warlike fantasies posing as science fiction.

The change from old style science fiction to magical war fantasies may have been started with the very successful movie "Star Wars".  The title tells you about all you need to know about the pacifism in this movie, and then "May the force be with you" tells you what you need to know about the attitude toward miracles and magic.  Star Wars had very little in the way of real science.  It was more like a typical war movie, only this time set in space.  As the space ships passed by, they made quite a bit of noise even though they were in a total vacuum.  Sorry, Star Wars fans, but there is no noise in space.  Little errors like this generally disqualify a movie from being real science fiction. Actually they are probably not even errors as much as a clear sign from the director that this movie is not intended for real science fiction fans.

"Hominids" took me back to an interesting time where real science fiction was better appreciated, in a world where science itself was respected, and evolution was taken for granted.  A time before the right wing backlash against science had begun its last ditch effort to take us back to the dark ages of superstition and witchcraft.

And so, just as much as the conservatives are tired about hearing what's wrong with religion, pollution, and exterminating species; I am also tired of arguments as to why we need to use up all the Earth's resources as fast as possible.  So to me this book was a comfortable read.

About Christian Persecution at Home

First I want to explain the picture, and maybe that's not necessary for a real football fan, but I had to look it up.  I think the picture on the right is Tim Tebow, in a Denver Broncos uniform.  As far as I'm concerned, there is nothing wrong with either picture, but apparently Tim Tebow is an overtly fundamentalist Christian who has exaggerated prayer rituals in football games, and a habit of painting biblical verses and chapters on the black paint under his eyes.  Back when he was a high school aged student, his parents home schooled him, and fought a successful legal battle to allow him to play football at a local high school even though he did not attend classes at that school.  Interesting football trivia.  Anyhow, back to the picture.  It seems a lot of football fans are upset over Tebow's religious displays (the picture here does not show his classical "Jesus loves me" pose), but there are also a lot of fans who love him. Below is the web page I got the picture from, and coincidentally it is written by another motorcyclist.  (In that way, he's like me, "The Lost Motorcyclist".)  He happens to be Christian and through the blog below, gives his views on this "attack" on Christianity, which actually is about the same as my view.  Could it be that motorcyclists think alike even though they may not have the same religion?

http://412ministry.blogspot.ca/2012/01/christians-and-persecution-complex.html

Now for my own ideas on the persecution of Christians. Fox News often portrays Christianity as being under attack, not only in the non-believer parts of the world, but also at home in the USA.  Is this true?  Is there really a "War on Christmas", for example.  Are Christians being forbidden to pray in schools or anywhere else?

Quote by Ronald Reagan, a Republican President of the USA from the nineteen eighties.
 "Today there are those who are fighting to make sure voluntary prayer is not returned to the classrooms. And the frustrating thing for the great majority of Americans who support and understand the special importance of religion in the national life -- the frustrating thing is that those who are attacking religion claim they are doing it in the name of tolerance, freedom, and openmindedness. Question: Isn't the real truth that they are intolerant of religion? They refuse to tolerate its importance in our lives.”

The fight about prayer in US public schools is between those who want the whole school to publicly pray to a Christian God, and those who say no children in public schools should be forced to pray to any God.

In my own experience there has been an upsurge in Christian Fundamentalism in the last fifty years, and it's quite possible that there has also been a pushback against it.  Also, during the same time it appears that there is a drop-off in church attendance, making it look like there are more anti-religious people around.  Also, ongoing immigration from non-Christian countries, may also have added a bit of fuel to the fire, as Christians see their old churches being bought by Muslim groups and converted into Mosques.

I think what had been a quite stable religious situation fifty years ago has become stirred up a bit.  And this includes Canada too.

But in my opinion, the most devastating attack on Christianity (as I know it) is not coming from Muslims or Atheists, but from within, from a certain type of right wing Fundamentalist Christianity.

I believe in tolerance, and freedom of religion, and I also share a belief in the supposed Christian values such as peace, love, and helping the poor.  But I'm never going to give up science, reason, and freedom of religion to support a faith-based gun-toting right wing political agenda.  Much less if that right wing religion is opposed to helping the poor, opposed to freedom of religion, opposed to education, and opposed to peace.

Is Justin Trudeau Really Flip Flopping on Charity?

Justin Trudeau, new leader of the Liberal Party of Canada has gotten into more trouble with the Conservatives.

Many months ago, Justin Trudeau was paid $20,000 by the Grace Foundation to be a speaker at a fundraiser.  Later on, a letter was sent from someone at the Grace Foundation to ask for the money back. It was not returned, and about a week ago,  the letter to Trudeau was made public by the Prime Minister's Office.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/charity-makes-statement-regarding-justin-trudeau-public-speaking-fee-dispute/article12735221/

The view from a seemingly Liberal slanted website:
http://thecanadianpoliticalscene.blogspot.ca/2013/06/grace-foundation-never-authorized.html

Is the scandal here that Trudeau charged an outlandish amount of money, considering that it was a charity, after all?

Or is it more of a scandal that The Grace Foundation engaged somebody at a mutually agreed amount, then demanded the money be returned, because they are a charity.

Or is the biggest scandal that the Grace Foundation asked an individual for donations, then upon receiving no response, attempted to shame them by publicizing their name?

Incidentally, not all charities are the same, as I have found out over the course of my life.  Some charities really do good work for the most unfortunate people, other totally legitimate, but more self-serving charities are only to fund local projects in wealthy neighbourhoods.

The Grace Foundation is legally a charitable organization, but I consider it more an unpaid auxiliary to the "Church of St. John and St. Stephen Home". Before I start feeling sorry for the residents of that Seniors home, I would like to know what fees they are charged, and who is allowed into that home, and why they are admitted.  Most of the better seniors homes (like this one) are not charitable institutions, and I would guess that many of the Grace Foundation board members volunteer mainly as a way to get priority admittance for their aged parents when the time comes.

I would consider a "real" charity to be something like "Doctors Without Borders", or a soup kitchen.  An example here in Kitchener is "The Working Centre", that helps unemployed people get jobs.

It's not such a bad thing to give money to a real charity, although some people get awfully worked up about giving money to poor people.  But I prefer to at least be given a choice in my charitable donations, and be allowed to do it privately.  I would not appreciate being publicly humiliated by any charity that I decline to donate money to.

The chairman of the board of the Grace Foundation has said he regrets that this issue has been made public, that he did not agree to it, and does not know why the letter was made public without official knowledge of the board.  That is a reasonable response.

Unfortunately, Justin changed his mind later and offered to give back the money to the Grace Foundation. I think that's a bad mistake, but I'm sure he can recover from headlines like the (conservative) London Free Press "Trudeau Flip Flops on Charity".

What the Grace Foundation should do now is ask for a matching donation from the Conservatives.  And ask any overtly conservative board members for a refund of any  expense money they paid them, such as mailing expenses. If the conservatives have millions of dollars to waste on negative TV ad campaigns, surely they could afford to donate a little to charity, especially when donating to charity becomes such a well publicized event.

Another Kick at the Horsepower Can

One of the most popular internet motorcycle blogs "The Kneeslider" recently attempted to answer the eternal question "Horsepower or torque?"

http://thekneeslider.com/what-is-horsepower-and-torque/

At the conclusion, it was stated:

"Both terms are important but they represent different things. Torque measures a force being applied while horsepower is a measure of how much work the force can do."

Now just a cotton pickin minute.  Didn't I write a blog explaining horsepower and torque in December 2008?

http://lostmotorcycles.blogspot.ca/2008/12/story-of-horsepower-vs-torque.html

Now, apparently I will have to explain it again and I obviously must do a better job this time. I need to prove the point in a nice simple way, once and for all, that torque is not a good indicator of engine performance, but horsepower is.

The fallacy in the torque argument has to do with where the torque is measured.  Torque numbers are always taken at the engine, but it actually needs to be measured at the rear wheel, because (1) it is only at the rear wheel that the torque produces thrust that drives the vehicle. And (2) torque is multiplied arbitrarily in the gearbox, that lies between the engine and the rear wheels.

The problem, restated, is that torque measured at the crank in the engine is not meaningful, because it can easily be multiplied, or divided by the gear box, or a chain or belt drive with sprockets, or any place the shaft speed changes before it arrives at the rear wheels.  You can increase or decrease torque infinitely, simply by changing the gear ratios or sprocket sizes.

It is true that horsepower, too, is always measured at the crank.  However, that's OK, because you cannot multiply or divide horsepower with gears.  Horsepower stays constant no matter the gear ratio. (allowing for minor friction losses)

Only comparisons at the rear wheel are meaningful in real world performance.  Measurements inside the engine are of academic interest only.  In spite of the gear ratios, crank horsepower is a fairly good indicator of rear wheel horsepower, while crank torque all by itself is not a good indicator of rear wheel torque, unless both vehicles are forced to run at the same number of revolutions per minute, and have the same gearing.

Now for some math, real easy this time

Vehicle 1 Final drive ratio: 2:1
Crank torque: 300 ft-lbs.   Rear wheel torque: 600 ft.-lbs.  (not allowing for friction)
Crank power: 150 hp.        Rear wheel HP: 146 hp.  (allowing for friction)
 
Vehicle 2 Final drive ratio: 4:1
Crank Torque: 250 ft.-lbs.  Rear wheel torque: 1000 ft.-lbs. (not allowing for friction)
Crank Power: 250 hp.        Rear wheel hp: 243.5 hp.  (allowing for friction)

So looking at the numbers, you might call foul.  Why does the high horsepower vehicle get to have a 4:1 drive ratio, while the high torque vehicle has a final drive of only 2:1?  That's because the high horsepower vehicle generally has a high speed engine, and it can (in this case) run at twice the speed of the high torque/low horsepower engine.  That allows you to run a higher overall gear ratio.  And that is how gear ratios are decided on in the first place.

So the secret of high torque, but low horsepower engines, is that if you do not measure speed, then high torque sounds good.  But when you do measure speed of these types of engines, you invariably find that they have a low rev-limit.  i.e. they are slow, and cannot be driven with  higher gear ratios.

The kneeslider article had a lot of comments, and one of them was in the form of a video.  The video showed a drag race between a 70 hp Harley chopper, and a 170 hp sport bike. The chopper won easily, supposedly proving that torque was more important than horsepower in a race.

http://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=4a88a935f5f0

As I watched the drag race between the chopper and the sport bike, I was struck by how the cards seemed to be stacked against the sport bike.

-The race was extremely short, just down a back alley.  In a short race, reaction time is almost as important as horsepower.  And it's quite obvious in the video that the chopper gets the initial start a few lengths ahead of the sport bike.

-A sport bike rider has to be fairly delicate about launching quickly off the line.  Sports bikes are high and short, and with enough power to lift the front tire, or even flip completely over backwards.  Sports bikes are not made for standing start drag races.  The chopper actually looks more like a drag bike, with a long wheelbase and low seat.  You would not have to worry as much about wheelies off the line.

-There are important unknowns, for example the type of tires being used, and the experience/skill of the riders.

-An engine like the Harley V-Twin has a large flywheel.  You can store extra energy in the motor by revving the engine up before the start, then dumping the clutch.  With a sticky rear tire, heavy flywheel, and a long, low bike, it is almost like getting a running start at the line.

In other words, the video has too many random variables other than the horsepower/torque numbers of the engines.

In any kind of actual race, you want horsepower, and you don't need to be concerned if your torque numbers are not the highest.  If you are just driving slowly, and you will rarely run your engine at high rpm, then buy a slow engine and don't worry about power.  You can probably also not worry about the torque either, unless you literally cannot get up the hills or keep up to the speed limit.

Here is an explanation that is about as close to reality as any I have seen.
http://www.automedia.com/Torque_Rules_Horsepower_is_King/pht20040601hp/1

Picture: Cat and horsepower, from Lovemeow.com
http://lovemeow.com/2010/02/cats-and-their-horse-and-deer-friends/

I Do Not Know Brian Mulroney, But I Voted For Him

Brian Mulroney, Prime Minister of Canada from 1983 to 1993, was born in Baie Comeau, Quebec.  Coincidentally so was I, but I was never Prime Minister of Canada.

I have said in my blog that I voted Conservative twice, both of those were for Brian Mulroney. (not in the same election, of course)  I used to be a lot more conservative back then, than I appear to be today.  Partly because I have changed a little, but more because of the extremism on the right in the USA, which spills over into Canada.

Although Brian Mulroney was elected democratically twice, by the time his last term was finished, Canadians hated the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada so much that the party no longer exists today. When I took a vacation in Saint Lucia in 1992, Mulroney's reputation had sunk very low.  A local street vendor approached me to buy some coconuts, and somehow it slipped out that I was Canadian.  He offered me his condolences, because we had such a horrible Prime Minister.

St Lucia was not the first time I had problems with Brian Mulroney's reputation.  When I was teaching in Sept-Iles QC, in 1973-75, Brian Mulroney was the CEO of the Iron Ore Company of Canada, and Sept Iles was a one-company town built by IOC.  The teachers on staff knew that both of us were from Baie Comeau, which was located not very far away.  Brian was in the process of shutting down the IOC's biggest iron mine, which did not sit well with the townspeople.  So I got several comments associating me with Brian, which was not true, as I never knew him or even attended the same school with him.  And anyway, he was ten years older than me.

When Brian became Prime Minister, all of a sudden Baie Comeau went from being a quiet unknown backwater town to being a well known town nationally.  Before this, if someone asked where I was from, I could say Baie Comeau, and generally receive blank stares in response.  When  Brian campaigned for prime minister, he made a very big deal being a "boy from Baie Comeau".  So after that successful campaign, whenever it came out where I was from, I was always asked if I knew Brian Mulroney.  And as time went on, and Brian became more and more hated, I felt a greater need to distance myself from him, pointing out that I always lived on Laval St. while Brian lived on Champlain St. The notoriety has died down a lot, but today I occasionally have this same reaction from people who find out where I live.  Canadians apparently have long memories.

Compared to today's conservatives, I think he was a good prime minister.  But there was the GST tax, that I suppose most people still blame him for.  I don't feel the GST was a bad tax, as it replaced a hidden tax. But many Canadians think differently.  On the other hand, he initiated the Acid Rain pact with the USA, that effectively put a stop to the acid rain pollution in the eighties.  Brian also spoke out against South Africa in the international campaign to stop apartheid.  Brian also brought in the Free Trade pact between Canada and the USA, which has given us prosperity even up to today.  Yes, I know Canadians love to complain about how poor we are, but that's because Canadians don't get out much, and half our brains, and all our asses are frozen in winter.  That's the simple excuse for our stupidity.

Long after Brian Mulroney left office, we found out that he had accepted bribes from an aircraft manufacturer to buy their merchandise.

Back when Brian was debating Liberal John Turner in the first election, it was all about appointing political friends to the senate (as it is again today).  During the debate, Brian pointed out all the recent dubious Liberal appointees to the senate (made by the previous leader Trudeau) and asked why John Turner did not cancel them.  Turner Replied that he had no option.

Brian replied

"You had an option, sir. You could have said, 'I am not going to do it. This is wrong for Canada, and I am not going to ask Canadians to pay the price.' You had an option, sir--to say 'no' — and you chose to say 'yes' to the old attitudes and the old stories of the Liberal Party."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney#Party_leader

Picture:  http://historyofthegreatwhitenorth.blogspot.ca/2011/05/brian-mulroney-boy-from-baie-comeau.html

A Scooter Helmet

Once again I got talked into buying a helmet.  I was looking for something between my half helmet, and my full face helmet. I should just wear my full face all the time.  But there are some downsides to it.  It is heavy, and too big to fit under the Burgman seat.  It is too expensive to leave strapped to the bike and bulky to carry around.  And now I find that sometimes it makes my nose itch.  When my nose itches, I have to keep lifting the face shield every few minutes to scratch it, and it is a distraction when driving.

I bought a new style of helmet that has become popular in Europe, sometimes called a Scooter helmet, sometimes a flight helmet.  Basically it is a traditional 3/4 helmet, that covers the ears but not the chin.  However, the hard shell covering the ears is shorter than usual, and has a flexible extension.  This way, the helmet can be pushed down to fit under the seat of a scooter, but still has some protection for the ears.

Another characteristic of the scooter helmet is a pivoting face shield, a bit shorter than the normal visor.  It reaches to about nose level, and has a cutout for the nose.  This again helps it store more easily, but allows bugs to hit you in the mouth, unless you have a windshield on the bike.

In Europe these helmets are sometimes called Momo helmets, after the design company that made them popular.  Momo design helmets cost over $300, but there are cheaper versions available from Zeus, CKX, Vega, and a few other manufacturers.  They take some of their styling cues from the Momo helmets, sometimes almost appearing to be a knock-off.

I found a scooter style helmet going for $40 at the Tri-City cycle discount outlet in Cambridge, so I bought it.  It was a CKX and also had a European style ratcheting quick-connect, instead of the traditional D-Rings.  It had an inner drop-down tinted visor as well as the clear external visor, and had the letters DOT on the back.

One thing I am starting to notice is that helmets have gotten bigger since the 1970's.  Back in the old days, helmets were about an inch thick all around.  Now they are more than 2 inches thick.  I guess that gives us greater protection, and today people are accustomed to the look of these huge astronaut-like helmets.  They would look very funny to anyone who was frozen in 1969 and thawed out in the twenty first century.

I found it a bit strange that a medium fit me.  Usually I take large.  But my friend Bob, also trying on the helmets, found that even the large was not big enough for him, and they didn't have the XXL sizes available.  I guess it must have something to do with head shape, something else we never considered important in the seventies.  Apparently there are big differences between round and oval headed people.

I took the helmet for a long test ride, and found that it was comfortable, but was too loud at high speed with the clear visor up.  That problem was easily solved by lowering the clear visor.

In direct sunlight, the clear visor was a bit milky if the sun was on it.  I find that direct sunshine will light up any imperfections, and make it harder to see through.  I cleaned off the visor and put some car wax on it, and that took care of the problem.  I did the same to the tinted visor, but the wax seemed to make it worse.  Anyway, it's not a huge problem, and so I'll let it go.  So far I have found no mention of problems like this on the internet, and I don't really understand how this could happen.

Today I went down to Port Dover on my 1969 Honda CD175.  I wore the scooter helmet with my black leather jacket.  I don't know if the two styles go together, but I'm guessing they do not.  I probably should wear the scooter helmet while riding the Suzuki Burgman, and I should have a hooded brown canvas jacket also.  I'm trying to remember what kind of jackets we wore riding Hondas in the seventies, but all I can remember is riding in short sleeve T-shirts, bell bottom jeans, and helmets with bubble shields.

Picture: Not my own helmet, but a similar style.

The End for America is Now in Sight

Finally after six years of back-to-back Obama scandals, I realize the right wing people are not nut jobs.  It looks like they were right all along.

A few days ago, there was a joint press conference with the Prime Minister of Turkey and President Obama of the United States.  During the conference, there was a light drizzle of rain. Obama forced two US Marines to hold umbrellas: one over his own head, and the other over the head of the Turkish state.  To me, this was an insignificant act.  The marines were standing around doing nothing anyway.  It's not like they were busy at the time rescuing the U.S. Ambassador in Benghazi.  No no, they were just standing around listening to a bunch of stupid questions being fielded by Obama and the Turkish guy.  They were probably hoping the rain would intensify enough to call off the whole thing.

But I was wrong.  This was not insignificant. What I did not know, was that no US president had ever asked a Marine to hold an umbrella over his head during a press conference - other than Obama.  And it was not the first time for Obama either.  The linked video clearly shows pictures of various Presidents holding their own umbrellas, and other pictures of Obama getting marines to hold his umbrella.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI_3hLrixOU

Now for the true insult of this seemingly small act.  If you didn't notice yourself, don't be embarrassed.  It means you are probably not from the Southern U.S. Many Canadians, like me, will miss this too.  Here is the clue: Look at the skin colour of the two men.  The one holding the umbrella is white, the one having the umbrella held over him is black. Therein lies the insult to real Americans (i.e. Southerners).

The true American way to do this, and one that would not have raised a single eyebrow south of Cincinnati and East of Waco Texas, would have been for the white guy to be the President of the USA, and the black guy to be the Marine holding the umbrella.

This umbrella thing was Obama's plan all along.  Health Care was a mere diversion. Killing Osama Bin Laden, a smoke screen.  Boosting the Dow Jones from 7,000 to 15,000 in six years was a red herring.  The hidden plan was to humiliate the white race by making them hold umbrellas for black people, thus destroying the real America.  There is no going back. Real Americans will have to reluctantly, and with heavy hearts, begin gearing up for the second Civil War  (or as real Americans prefer to call it:  "the Second War Between the States" or  "Second War for Southern Independence" or  "Second War of Northern Aggression".) And finally, Al Quaida's plan will be complete: America torn apart just like they destroyed the Soviet Union back in 1990.  All their thanks go to Obama.

An outsiders opinion (from Nigeria) http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/350336

Picture: From http://astuteblogger.blogspot.ca/2013/05/obama-umbrellas-and-what-it-all-rev.html