Thursday, July 29, 2010

Difficulty in Recognizing One’s Ignorance and Incompetence

Difficulty in Recognizing One’s Ignorance and Incompetence:

David Dunning, a Cornell professor of social psychology, became fascinated by the true story of McArthur Wheeler, an incompetent bank robber who believed that rubbing your face with lemon juice rendered you invisible to video cameras.

Dunning wondered whether, since Wheeler was too stupid to be a bank robber, he might also be too stupid to know that he was too stupid to be a bank robber. In other words, his stupidity protected him from an awareness of his own stupidity.

Dunning wondered if the principle could be applied to more people than just Wheeler, and along with graduate student Justin Kruger, he wrote the paper, "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties of Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-assessments."

According to the New York Times:

"Dunning and Kruger argued ... 'When people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it.

Instead, like Mr. Wheeler, they are left with the erroneous impression they are doing just fine.'"

Sources:


They say ignorance is bliss … and if you agree with the Dunning-Kruger effect, this statement is very true to life. After conducting four studies, Dunning and Kruger determined that some people overestimate just how smart they are, and the less skilled a person actually is, the less able they are to realize it.

In many ways this study has great applicability for those who have formal education and choose to completely discount any natural medicine approach in favor of the drug and chemical paradigm.

“Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it,” they wrote.

For instance, the participants who scored in the 12th percentile for intelligence estimated they were actually in the 62nd. Ironically, however, the participants were able to improve upon their skills, and therefore also their metacognitive competence, and this in turn helped them realize the limitations of their abilities.

So what does this all mean to you?

Ignorance is all around us … but many do not realize their cognitive limitations. Dunning told the New York Times:

“Even if you are just the most honest, impartial person that you could be, you would still have a problem — namely, when your knowledge or expertise is imperfect, you really don’t know it. Left to your own devices, you just don’t know it. We’re not very good at knowing what we don’t know.”

“Known Unknowns” and “Unknown Unknowns”

The notion of “unknown unknowns” originated in the world of design and engineering. To put it simply, you have within your realm of experience “known unknowns” and the far more daunting “unknown unknowns.”

The latter are those circumstances that are so far removed from our ordinary experience that we cannot even fathom them -- like the idea that you could be living in a computer simulation right now. A sign of an intelligent person is knowing there are things you don’t know, but a sign of an even more intelligent person may be knowing there are things that you don’t know you don’t know.

When you may run into trouble, on the other hand, is when you believe you know everything and close your mind to learning any new ideas. Unfortunately, a great deal of the underlying premises upon which our society was built fall into this realm.

Take, for instance, the notion that the world, especially biology and medicine, operates through Newtonian physics. It says you live in a mechanical universe.

According to this belief, your body is a physical machine, so by modifying the parts of the machine, you can modify your health.

As a physical machine, your body responds to physical “things” like chemicals and drugs, and by adjusting the drugs that modify your machinery, doctors can modify and control life.

Now, with the advent of quantum physics, scientists have realized that this theory is flawed because quantum physics show that the invisible, immaterial realm is far more important than the material realm.

In fact, your thoughts may shape your environment far more than physical matter. Unfortunately, many “conventional” experts in the field of medicine refuse to believe in these “unknown unknowns” -- a definite sign of ignorance if there ever was one.

As Voltaire said, "A state of doubt is unpleasant, but a state of certainty is ridiculous."

Can You Harness That Which You Don’t Know?

Even if you are too self-deceived to know you are ignorant, you can improve your skills and help realize the level of your limitations, according to Dunning and Kruger.

I also believe everyone has the power to access their subconscious abilities, and these are skills that are not adequately measured by any conventional test of intelligence at this time.

According to Dr. Richard Bartlett’s Matrix Energetics (ME), for instance, your right brain can actually access information that is normally blocked by your conscious attention, if you allow that information to come through and pay attention to it.

Regardless of your intellectual abilities, you can learn to hear your instincts, listen to them well, and ultimately harness this energy to maximize and optimize the life experiences available to you.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Raids are increasing on farms and private food-supply clubs—here are 5 tips for surviving one | Grist

Raids are increasing on farms and private food-supply clubs—here are 5 tips for surviving one | Grist: "Raw deal

When the 20 agents arrived bearing a search warrant at her Ventura County farmhouse door at 7 a.m. on a Wednesday a couple weeks back, Sharon Palmer didn't know what to say. This was the third time she was being raided in 18 months, and she had thought she was on her way to resolving the problem over labeling of her goat cheese that prompted the other two raids. (In addition to producing goat's milk, she raises cattle, pigs, and chickens, and makes the meat available via a CSA.)

But her 12-year-old daughter, Jasmine, wasn't the least bit tongue-tied. "She started back-talking to them," recalls Palmer. "She said, 'If you take my computer again, I can't do my homework.' This would be the third computer we will have lost. I still haven't gotten the computers back that they took in the previous two raids."

As part of a five-hour-plus search of her barn and home, the agents -- from the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office, Los Angeles County Sheriff, Ventura County Sheriff, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture -- took the replacement computer, along with milk she feeds her chickens and pigs.

While no one will say officially what the purpose of this latest raid was, aside from being part of an investigation in progress, what is very clear is that government raids of producers, distributors, and even consumers of nutritionally dense foods appear to be happening ever more frequently. Sometimes they are meant to counter raw dairy production, other times to challenge private food organizations over whether they should be licensed as food retailers.

The same day Sharon Palmer's farm was raided, there was a raid on Rawesome Foods, a Venice, Calif., private food club run by nutritionist and raw-food advocate Aajonus Vonderplanitz. For a membership fee of $25, consumers can purchase unpasteurized dairy products, eggs that are not only organic but unwashed, and a wide assortment of fermented vegetables and other products.

The main difference in the two raids seems to be that Palmer's raiding party was actually much smaller, about half the size of the Venice contingent: Vonderplanitz was also visited by the FBI and the FDA.

In the Rawesome raid, agents made off with several thousand dollars worth of raw honey and raw dairy products. They also shut Rawesome for failure to have a public health permit, though the size and scope of the raid suggests the government officials might have more in mind. Regardless, within hours the outlet reopened in defiance of the shutdown order.

Earlier in June, agents of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, escorted by police and also bearing search warrants, raided and shut down Traditional Foods Warehouse, a popular food club in Minneapolis specializing in locally-produced foods. They also raided two farms suspected of illegally selling raw milk. And in a national first among such raids, agents searched a private home and made off with computers; the family's offense appears to have been that it allowed one of the raw dairy farmers to park in its driveway to distribute raw milk to area residents who had ordered it.

The Minnesota Department of Agriculture has declined comment on such raids, saying they are part of an ongoing investigation into raw milk distribution in the state in lieu of eight illnesses in May linked to raw milk.

Meanwhile, the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection has launched three raids over the last three months on the dairy farm and farm store of Vernon Hershberger, near Madison. The day after DATCP agents placed seals on his fridges storing raw dairy products in July, Hershberger cut the seals, and announced he was going to challenge the agency's contention he needs a dairy and retail license to sell his products. Obtaining such licenses would be problematic, though, since Wisconsin prohibits sale of raw milk, except "incidental" sales, and defining "incidental" has been a bone of contention for many years. In any event, Hershberger contends he sells only to consumers who contract privately for his food.

What's behind all these raids? They seem to stem from increasing concern at both the state and federal level about the spread of private food groups that have sprung up around the country in recent years -- food clubs and buying groups to provide specialized local products that are generally unavailable in groceries, like grass-fed meats, pastured eggs, fermented foods, and, in some cases, raw dairy products. Because they are private and limited to consumers who sign up for membership, these groups generally avoid obtaining retail and public health licenses required of retailers that sell to the general public.

In late 2008 and early 2009, the representatives of state agriculture agencies in Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois met via phone conferences with representatives of the FDA to map a plan for targeting raw-milk buying clubs in the Midwest. The meetings came to light after Max Kane, the owner of a Wisconsin buying club who was subpoenaed by Wisconsin authorities for the names of his customers and suppliers, obtained email accounts of the sessions via a Freedom of Information request to Wisconsin's Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection department. (Kane has since been prosecuted by Wisconsin authorities for contempt of court for failing to give up the names; his case is under appeal after he was found guilty last December.)

Now, the Midwest program seems to have gone national, and the recent spate of raids suggests a quickening pace and broadened scope. While most raids before the Midwest government meetings had been related to raw-milk distribution, some, like a December 2008 armed raid of Manna Storehouse, an Ohio food club near Cleveland, have been about licensing issues. In that raid, armed law enforcement officers held a mother and eight young children being home-schooled at gunpoint for several hours while they searched the home and food storage areas. A legal challenge to the raid by the family is still tied up in court.

The current uptick has Pete Kennedy of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund concerned, not only about the spreading of the raids, but about the seemingly easy willingness of judges to hand out search warrants. While the U.S. Constitution's fourth amendment suggests judges should exercise tight controls over search warrants ("no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause..."), Kennedy observes, "I haven't seen an agency turned down yet" over the last four years in requests for search warrants connected with raw milk and other food production and distribution.

Given that the targets of search warrants don't get a say in court as to whether they should be issued, legal experts and those who have been raided say the most that food producers can do is take steps to prepare themselves to weather the raids as best they can.

Here are five suggestions they offer:
  1. Be wary of strangers who want to join your private buying group or herdshare: Before they seek out a search warrant, regulators invariably nose around and infiltrate private buying groups or raw milk herdshares to gain information on "probable cause." They'll often make up sad stories as to why they should be allowed to join. Gary Cox of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund recalls how an undercover agent from the New York Department of Agriculture and Markets infiltrated Meadowsweet Dairy LLC, a private organization of 120 Ithaca consumers who bought shares to gain access to raw dairy products, in 2007: "He was insistent. 'I live so far away, and I only come here so very infrequently, so can't I at least have some (milk) today, PLEEEEEEEASE, because otherwise I won't be able to get any for a long time.' Barb Smith felt sorry for him and relented. We know what the consequence was of her kindness." The consequence was an open-ended search warrant that agents used several times in late 2007 and early 2008 to confiscate product, leading up to a legal challenge to the LLC that is currently under appeal following rulings in New York state courts against Meadowsweet.

  2. Have a video camera at the ready: Since search warrants are usually specific as to what can be searched and/or seized, a video recording of events inhibits abuses by regulators and other law enforcement personnel. Regulators and law enforcement officials definitely don't appreciate being videotaped, and sometimes will simply disconnect videos or order targeted individuals to put the videos away. According to Aajonus Vonderpanitz, in the June raid of his Rawesome Foods outlet, "They unplugged our surveillance camera to hide their actions. They threateningly refused video capture of their raid when members commenced filming."

  3. Have a plan of action: Much like planning how your family might escape a fire, decide in advance who will handle the video camera, who will collect business cards or take down the names of all agents, and who will interact with the regulators. The regulators and police count on the element of surprise to sow confusion, and keep the targets from responding intelligently.

  4. Read the search warrant fine print: Sometimes there are limitations on the search warrants that targets can exploit. Vernon Hershberger, the Wisconsin dairy farmer, was able to slow the regulators down because he knew the search warrant in his case likely wouldn't allow forcible entry, so when agents returned a second time, after he cut the seals on his fridges, he locked his farm store doors and they were forced to leave. They eventually returned with an amended warrant that specifically allowed them to take his computer.

  5. Keep computer backups: In nearly all such raids, the authorities confiscate computers so they can document transactions and customer interactions. If you don't have a backup of what's on your disk, you can literally be put out of business. Moreover, it's advisable to monitor what information you keep on the computer in the farmhouse or in your food club. There's something to be said for backing up every few days onto another computer kept off-site.

David Gumpert is the author of The Raw Milk Revolution: Behind America’s Emerging Battle Over Food Rights (Chelsea Green, 2009). He is also a journalist who specializes in covering the intersection of health and business. His popular blog has chronicled the increasingly unsettling battles over raw milk. He has authored or coauthored seven books on various aspects of entrepreneurship and business and previously been a reporter and editor with the Wall Street Journal, Inc. magazine, and the Harvard Business Review.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

More movies



Why All the Angst Over Nullification? Just Do It! by Gary D. Barnett

Why All the Angst Over Nullification? Just Do It! by Gary D. Barnett:

Why All the Angst Over Nullification? Just Do It!

Posted: March 27th, 2010 by Militant Libertarian

by Gary D. Barnett, LWR

Recent talk of state nullification of unconstitutional federal laws has been rampant, and now that “Obamacare” has been passed, I’m sure many more nullification resolutions and bills will be forthcoming. Already, many state attorneys general have filed suit against the federal government’s plan to force the purchase of “health insurance.” But as Judge Andrew Napolitano recently pointed out in this interview, these efforts are little more than governors attempting to make a splash in order to gain favor with voters. These efforts, whether legitimate or not, will do little or nothing to actually void the fed’s new law. But this seems to be the case with most all empty nullification resolutions and bills; they go nowhere because no other action is taken by the states or by the sovereign individuals residing in those states. This in my opinion is a major problem.

Recently, Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, penned an article about nullification and the Tenth Amendment movement. It is informative because he lists all the different nullification efforts currently in place, and they are numerous. In fact, there are so many it is virtually impossible to keep up with all of them. In addition, more are evident all the time. I think this process more politically motivated than anything else, and of little use in the real world. According to his article, there are now nullification efforts concerning:

Besides all of these, several more are in the pipeline. Why?

Considering the way the current nullification process is handled, some believe that if enough states get on board, some federal legislation can be delayed, and others think that if there is massive state resistance, this legislation can be in practice rendered null and void. Considering the long term, I completely disagree. As far as I can tell, liberty, freedom and civil rights have deteriorated constantly and consistently regardless of any makeshift efforts to stop it by the false state nullification process, or as I see it: nullification in name only. This deterioration has been going on for decades, and currently the total annihilation of our rights is in high gear. Real nullification requires action, not words, and the teeth behind current and past nullifications have been missing.

My attitude is certainly different than that of constitutional scholars, but are most mainstream constitutional scholars correct in their thinking? I don’t really care if a constitutional lawyer says that government-forced health insurance or any other welfare scheme is constitutional or not. In order to believe that, one would have to also believe that theft is then constitutional. I am perfectly competent enough to figure out what is right and what is wrong; constitution or not. But if one is going to refer to the constitution as the basis for dissent, then I think consistency is important. The ultimate nullification language is already in place in the constitution so why then all the angst? The Tenth Amendment states:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Why put forth hundreds and hundreds of separate state nullification resolutions, bills and acts, when the preeminent nullification, the Tenth Amendment, already exists? Instead of continuing to draft worthless resolution after resolution, why not just refuse absolutely to comply with any federal law deemed unconstitutional by the state or by the people? Just do it! Simple, to the point, effective and easy!

Gaining agreement from some federal court (notice the term federal) to nullify the federal government is not likely. Why would the feds rule against themselves? It’s up to the states and more importantly to the people to decide what is constitutional or not. How can this decision be left up the very entity that is perpetrating the harm?

While we’re at it, why not nullify all the rest of the unconstitutional and anti-liberty legislation that has been forced upon us over the years? I say let’s nullify Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Prescription Drugs, the USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act, mandatory Unemployment Insurance and Workers Comp. And let’s not stop there. How about nullifying the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, The FDA, the Federal Reserve, and most every other unconstitutional government agency that exists today? I think this would be a good start!

If those currently bringing forward nullification efforts were really serious, they would just do it! They would simply tell the feds based upon the Tenth Amendment of the constitution, that they would under no circumstances comply with any federal law deemed by the state to be unconstitutional or against liberty. Then if the feds attempted to force compliance, the state would have every right to defend itself and its people, and would then have a valid right to secede should that extreme measure become necessary.

Neil Siegel, professor of law at Duke University, in this very slanted interview on NPR with the brilliant Tom Woods said: “Any talk of nullification bothers me because it is talk of lawlessness.” This thinking of course is asinine and backwards, because nullification prevents lawlessness, it does not promote it. Siegel’s attitude is one that supports government as master of all things. In his mind, there should be no possibility of dissent where the federal government is concerned. If this was true, we might as well have a sovereign king ruling over us for life.

If we are to ever be a free people again, we will have to act like free people. Being free is not easy. It takes strength, determination, individual responsibility and guts! Standing up to the very powerful federal government is most definitely a challenge, but if we don’t, what will be the final outcome?

Real nullification is a way to guarantee more liberty. It is simply a method to an end, and that end is freedom. It does not have to be violent; quite the contrary. If all the states that are now filing suit and drafting nullification documents against the feds would just stand together, the feds would be overwhelmed. They would have little choice but to acquiesce to our demands. And all that would be required by the states is to actively and physically refuse to obey or enforce any bad federal law inside state borders. Considering the Tenth Amendment, the states have every right to do just that!

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index

Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index:

Barack Obama (2009-Present)
EO's 13489 - 13545 | Subject Index

George W. Bush (2001-2009)

EO's 13198-13488 | Subject Index

William J. Clinton (1993-2001)
EO's 12834-13197 | Subject Index

George Bush (1989-1993)
EO's 12668-12833

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
EO's 12287-12667

Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
EO's 11967-12286

Gerald R. Ford (1974-1977)
EO's 11798-11966

Richard Nixon (1969-1974)
EO's 11452-11797

Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)
EO's 11128-11451

John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)
EO's 10914-11127