Dee Lightner

Someone is shy

Dee hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted 3 months ago
Pamela Ronald: The case for engineering our food
Thanks for the reply. I guess that when I was younger and used to see lots of bees near cornfields, they were probably looking for plants that might have been growing in conjunction with the corn crop (weeds I guess). But I definitely remember seeing lot of bees near the field. I am trying to grow milkweed. I got free seeds from an environmental center and have planted some, hope it grows.
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted 3 months ago
Pamela Ronald: The case for engineering our food
I do think we need more food for the people. But I do have a questions abut this genetically engineering of plants. I live in a rural area that has a LOT of farms. And I notice that the plants really do produce a LOT more than they did in the "old days".. For example, when I was a kids and went to my uncle's farm, we could walk down the rows between the corn plants with no problem. today when I see the corn fields lining the roads near my house it is easy to see that the plants are MUCH closer in the rows than before. And I am thinking that this is because of both plant engineering that allows plants to resist bugs. But one thing I for sure do NOT see here. In the old days, when I rode down country roads and saw fields of corn, I also saw a LOT of honey bees and other things like butterflies. Here where I alive I have not seen a honey bee in over 4 years. Last year I actually saw ONE Monarch butterfly. So, what I am wondering is, have we genetically engineered plants to the point that the insects that used to pollinate the plants just no longer recognize the plants as 'food' or as plants that they need? Are the Monarchs gone because we have used so many herbicides that killed milkweed, that they have no plants to support their caterpillars? So, is it really good to use so many genetic mutations? I have heard that Einstein once said something about the link between the disappearance of the bees and the disappearance of mankind. Did he really say that? If so, should we keep on doing stuff that might be getting rid of the bees? I do know there are a lot of hungry people. But I think the answer might be to NOT have so many people and a lot more BEES!
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted 3 months ago
Gary Haugen: The hidden reason for poverty the world needs to address now
I don't think human nature is to take care of the herd. I think it is to take care of oneself, and then those of the "herd" who are YOUR herd. Not all those other people out there who are simply fodder for their money-making machine! And the thing about human nature that keeps the 'system' working is that the 'rest' of the people who are not in the privileged herd just put up with it! And the regular herd just are manipulated into some sort of acceptance. I think there are those at the top who are master manipulators. Then there are the ones in the middle who are the 'enforcers', those who have the carrot of some prize dangled before them by the manipulators, so they are willing to use whatever violence is needed to keep those on the bottom down. Then there are the regular people on the bottom, the folks who would just like to have enough to live a decent life, but who are bullied and terrified by the enforcers, who do it because the manipulators promise them something. Of course the enforcers rarely get the big prize and that makes them mad and they become even more ruthless and sadistic. Pardon any typos, I am watching Wheel of Fortune and trying to type at the same time!
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted 3 months ago
Gary Haugen: The hidden reason for poverty the world needs to address now
I am not sure that fixing law enforcement is the answer to the problem. I think the real answer is to "fix" human nature. And I am pretty sure that cannot be fixed. What i mean is, in just about every society (and really I guess EVERY society) there are those who TAKE power by whatever means, and those who have no power. And it seems that it is in the human nature of those with power to have it, to take it by whatever means. Some take a lot of power and they are the "leaders" and the rich and those who control through economic means. and there are many more who control through fear, and take their powr by whatever means come to hand. He mentions what happened in Nazi Germany, when there was so much violence and many people just seemed to turn their backs and not even see it. I read a comment somewhere that ended with something like "when they came for me, there was no one to hear". That is not the actual comment, but it is what happens. And why I say it is human nature that spawns that attitude of not seeing is not only because of the violence this speaker is talking about, but even in something like global warming and the naysayers. It is like the people who do not see violence are like the naysayers, and probably see themselves as being somehow "special". In the case of poverty and violence they are happy to "contribute" money, but think it will never touch them so they really don't care. Like global warming will somehow spare these who do not believe, or who think that they are so special they will survive when the rest of mankind dies! I think that unless (not until) we can change the human nature that makes so many people able to ignore what is going on and not really caring, because they think it will never touch them, violence, poverty and all the bad things in the world will just continue. Some people are just bad. Period. Violence and poverty re the result.
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted 9 months ago
Ramsey Musallam: 3 rules to spark learning
Several years ago I became a substitute teacher. (I was retired from the accounting field). I have subbed in just about everything, from K to high school. And from special needs kids to the high acheivers. One thing I learned right away is kids WANT to learn. A couple of experiences taught me this. First, when working with a kindergaten class we were talking about the various animals and how they live. I gave them a "word of the day". Nocturnal. And I explained what it meant, what animals who are nocturnal do and as much as I could think of off the top of my head. I had them repeat the word and the meaning several times during the day. During the following school year I happened to do a first grade at the same school and had many of the same kids in the class. I asked them what the word of the day was that I had given them the previous year. Little hands went up all over the room. Not only did those kids remembe the word, but they could explain in DETAIL what it means and list some particular animals! I usually stop at about five mnutes before dismissal and let the kids ask me ANYTHING, and if I know the answer I tell them, or I tell them how to learn the answer. That led to the second experience. A third grader asked, "if you are paralyzed from head to toe do your eyeballs move"? To that one I did NOT know the answer, but told the child how to find it. What could have possibly made a young child ask that dynamite question? In a gym class I explained the need to cool down and showed the kids how to take their pulse. At dismissal I saw one of my students showing other kids how to take their pulse!! Not only did I teach that child somethig, but I made HER a teacher! Even in disruptive classes I have had a lot of success with ENGAGING the students in something interesting linked to their leson plan! All these students WANTED to learn, and DID learn something. It is a waste the way we "teach", and our loss.
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted over 1 year ago
Anne Milgram: Why smart statistics are the key to fighting crime
First, I almost laughed out loud when she mentioned fighting CORRUPTION in NewJjersey, given the latest story about the infamous bridge closure. Looks like the corruption fight went well! Second, I do see that the COST to the taxpayer of keeping so many people in jail is ENORMOUS! I do think that some 'low level', non violnt people should not be housed at the public expense. But I DO NOT want a lot of them out roaming the streets. How much would it cost to outfit each criminal out on bail with an ankle monitor, as opposed to housing them in jail, (with three hots and a cot, as they say)? It could NOT be as expensive, and we could not only know where they are at all times, but in the event that they decide to commit another crime we could actuallyhave some proof in the form of the data from the device. What irks me about this talk, and just about every other talk I have ever heard on the subject of how to fight crime, is three things. The first is that in any given area the citizens usually KNOW who the bad guys are, and it's incredible that law enforcement does not seem to have the same knowledge. The second is that not only do the citizens (potential victims) have that knowledge, but they also enable the crimiinals by their own actions. For example, if no one BOUGHT stolen goods from crooks, the crooks would stop STEALING the stuff in the first place. And the stolen stuff often goes right back into the area where it was stolen! And the third thing is, no one seems to mention how EXCITING it is to be a criminal! When you break into someone's home and steal their possessions it must be INCREDIBLY exciting and the adrenalin rush is spectacular. So. until we address these issues, how can we expect to make a dent in the crimes? However, one point on which I agree with this data share concept is, jurisdictions MUST stop being jurisdictional and start SHARING data! Data is the MOST important tool to fight crime.
Noface
Dee Lightner
Posted over 1 year ago
Some countries have a low "safety net". Do you think a "ceiling height" should also be established?
I seriously doiubt that a high limit on income would help the poor. It would just mean that the rich would have to stop piling up money but it would not make them give up a dime of already accumulated wealth for the common good. they would just move their cash to the offshore accounts, live in foreign countries so as to avoid taxes here. The thing is, the rich just want to be richer and to hell with the poor. I wonder, just how much money does it take for a rich person to say enough? And that baloney about job creators is just that baloney!