Technology and... Nature?

I will begin by admitting that I love modern, digital technology; unabashedly and unashamedly I am enthralled by what we've managed to do with silicone and electricity. The sheer volume of information we can access and control, the content we can create at a moment's notice, is unprecedented in human history. The reality of being able to access, manipulate and add to - in a very real sense - the whole of human knowledge from a device smaller than a package of cigarettes, is unbelievable. To use a word that is over-used in the English language: It's awesome.

Not awesome in the sense of, pancakes in bed are awesome. I mean awesome, like, I have seen the depths of universe and have been irrevocably changed by it, awesome. The technology that we wield with aplomb and abandon, is nothing short of Awesome (capital A intended).

Now, here is the "However".

I think that our technology has limits to where it belongs.

In an age where children are exposed to screens for an average of 53 hours per week outside of school time, that there are some places where we need to put the devices away. While information is powerful, it cannot replace experience. In many cases I think it can't even augment experience in a meaningful way. Every time we place a screen between us and a real experience, we are mediating that experience. We are making the experience more sterile, cleaner. The trade off is that we can access all sorts of supplementary information about the experience by mediating it.

My question is: Is it worth it? Is the extra information we can get online, via smart-device worth the price of tactility? Would you rather have your child learn about the animals in a wetland by leaning in with a dip net, carefully catching insects, larvae, fish, amphibians and, with the guidance of a facilitator, learn about those animals and all the connections between the animals, the habitat, the child and the greater environment beyond? Or, would you rather your child stood at the edge of the pond, pointed a digital device at it, took a picture and the went surfing online for information about ponds and wetlands - all while texting their friends?

I will choose the less-sterile, more connected experience every time.

You may argue that some kids don't have the opportunity to visit natural spaces, to get dirty and to explore wetlands (keeping with our pond example). I would counter-argue, that it's your responsibility as a parent to provide your child with those experiences. If you can't, there are resources in almost every community that can help you. And often, those resources are free-to-minimal-cost.

The point is, that nature doesn't need to be mediated. Experiences with nature and natural environments don't need to be enhanced with video, interactive content and QR codes taking you to websites for more information.

I argued in an earlier post (two or three years ago) that we have lost our ability to be awed. At that time I was talking about technology. We have lost our ability to be astounded by the next great thing our digital device will do. We simply expect the next generation-device to be faster, more advanced, more capable. Well, I think that along with the inability to be awed by technology, we've lost our ability to be awed by nature.

We - and I admit I'm talking in broad strokes here - live in a society that is so driven by dynamic imagery, that we can look at the mist on a pond say to ourselves "Pretty", and then pull out our phones to check in to twitter or Facebook. We have lost the ability to watch the mist curl over the water and dance on the air currents. We have lost the desire to simply sit at the pond edge and watch the ducklings trail along behind their mother or to peer through the cattails and spy on a fishing spider, dangling over the water. We'd rather point our phones at a code and watch a video of the very thing that is in front of us - live.

And yet, when we interpreters can get people's attention and get them to sit and close their eyes and listen or to simply sit and watch the pond with new eyes, they're hooked. I've seen well-healed, metro-urbanites nearly brought to tears when they sat on the Nature Centre's viewing deck and simply listened to the activity on the pond.

Invariably the first two words out of their mouths are: "That's Awesome."

New Look - Keep or Toss?

Blogger has given us a bunch of new "Dynamic Layouts" to play with. What do you think of this look? You, the reader, can change it by clicking on one of the tabs (mosaic, magazine etc...) just under the title bar.

I think it looks slick, but I think I miss some of the functionality of the more traditional layouts. Gone are the sidebar links to other blogs and websites, gone is the shelfari widget.... I'm conflicted. What's more important to you? Do you like the readability and the improved access to old posts, offered by the new layout? Or do you prefer the old layout?

Let me know. Comment below.

Alberta SRD - Cougars & Outdoor Recreation

Alberta SRD - Cougars & Outdoor Recreation

How to Justify a Killing

I am quoting liberally from myself in the attempt to frame my thoughts about last night's killing of Troy Davis. Please indulge me in the first section of rather dry academics.

“There is… consistency between what a person knows or believes and what he (sic) does” (Festinger, 1957, p. 1). According to Festinger, we are unconsciously strive for consistency between what we believe and how we act. Acting against our beliefs sets up inconsistencies that we feel compelled to make sense of by either changing our behaviours or our beliefs. In Festinger’s (1957) opening chapter he illustrates a smoker rationalizing the dangers of smoking. The smoker tells him or herself that it is too hard to quit, or that smoking makes them feel good, or that it can’t be as bad as people think. This rationalizing of the inconsistency of smoking when the smoker knows it is a dangerous habit brings the belief and the action into consonance.

However, Festinger postulated that these inconsistencies cannot always be rationalized into consonance. When they can’t for some reason, or when the attempts to rationalize fail, then the inconsistency remains. “Under such circumstances – that is in the presence of an inconsistency – there is psychological discomfort” (Festinger, 1957, p. 2), which he referred to as cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory states that dissonance is psychologically damaging and that a person will be motivated “to try to reduce dissonance and achieve consonance” (Festinger, 1957, p. 2). When confronted by cognitive dissonance (i.e., when one’s behaviours and beliefs are not congruent), a person will not only seek to abate the dissonance, but will also seek to “avoid situations or information which would likely increase the dissonance” (Festinger, 1957, p. 3).

Setting aside the morality issues surrounding the death-penalty as a punitive tool, I think that there is some worth in framing Troy Davis's execution around cognitive dissoance.

Troy Davis was convicted in 1991 of the beating and shooting death of a police officer (that's the extremely short version). He was convicted on eye-witness testimony and some circumstantial evidence around a gun that he once owned being the same caliber as the gun that killed Officer MacPhail. However, there was no direct-evidence linking Davis to the actual killing. Davis for his part has never denied being at the crime scene. He has always maintained that he didn't actually kill MacPhail.

In North American courts of law the burden of proof lies with the prosecuters. It is up to them to establish the accused's guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. In 1991, with their witnesses' testimonies, prosecutors acheived that benchmark in the minds of the jury. Davis was sentenced to death and the process of appeals etc... began. This is the place where a discussion about the morality of capital punishment should take place.

However over the years. seven of the eye witnesses have recanted their testimony; many of them claiming they were coerced by the police into signing statements, that as illiterates the witnesses couldn't read or understand. One of the prosecution witnesses is widely-believed to be the actual shooter; deflecting blame from himself by accusing Davis. Again it has been pointed out, there is no actual, physical forensic evidence linking Davis to this horrible crime.

It would seem, to my non-law-trained brain, that there is ample room for the seeds of doubt to be sewn. At the very least, it would seem to me that it would be reasonable at this point to stop the execution timetable, and just make sure the State was killing the right person. After all there is a maxim in demorcratic societies along the lines of: better ten guilty men go free, than one innocent man be punished. In other words, we err on the side of caution.

And yet, last night Troy Davis was executed by the State of Georgia.

The Georgia prosecutors are a case study in dissonance reduction.

The prosecution said right up to end - and continue to say - they feel that the recanted testimonies and the pointing to a lack of physical evidence are a sideshow, aimed at distracting the puiblic from "the truth"; that Troy Davis killed a cop. The Georgia prosecuters are so tied to their belief - to their belief in themselves and to their self-worth - that they denied a request from Davis' defense team for Davis to take a polygraph test in order to establish some reasonable doubt. Ironic coming from a State who's prosecution teams routinely attempt to get polygraph evidence admitted.

The Georgia prosecutors likely define themselves as:

• crusaders for the rights of victims
• the guardians of the public trust
• the acheivers of justice for families
• the punishers of criminals
• the leaders in the fight for safe communities

These are all noble characteristics, to be sure. However, it would seem that the prosecutors are so invested in this self-image that they are unable to accept information that challenges their beliefs. For them to accept the recanted evidence is to accept - what they would preceive - a personal flaw, a failing, a challenge to their integrity.

According to Festinger, the human brain needs connsonance. It needs to have its beliefs and actions in sync. To exist otherwise is to cause psychological damage. In this case the prosecutors have two options to reduce their dissonace. They can choose to accept the new evidence, accept that they may have made a mistake and work to fix it. They can reopen the trial, ask the state to delay (at the very least) the execution while they re-examine the evidence and work to commute - if needed - the death sentence or overturn the conviction. This option would have spared Davis' life. It may have kept him in prison but it would have kept him alive. In short, they would have to modify the way they self-identify.

The other option for the prosecutors to acheive consonance is to reject the dissonant information out of hand. Like a smoker who denegrates warning labelling on cigarette packs, a climate change denyer who invokes the econonmy, or a rapist who says "she was asking for it", the prosecutors in Georgia decided to reduce their dissonace by deriding the advocates for clemency and ignoring the evidence that was under their noses. Their statement was that all the evidence that should have lead them away from Davis' execution, was a sideshow meant to delay justice.

In the end, the prosecutors will sleep well having confirmed to themselves that they acted in a way that affirms their self-worth.

And while he may not have been truly innocent, a man has died under a cloud of uncertainty because people in power wanted the easy way out.

Drinking Gin on Hornby

"Winding roads go to interesting places." So says my wife.

Winding roads lead to places of mystery and intrigue, to backwoods and sandy beaches, to mountains and to valleys. Interesting things and fabulous adventures are found along and at the end of winding roads.

Hornby Island is a case study in "The things you find along winding roads." Hornby's myriad winding roads lead to beaches, an endless array of pottery studios, stained glass artisans, houses with astounding views, little known campsites, marinas, wineries and cemeteries. There are winding roads to trailheads for hiking and biking and winding roads that make you think twice - while the theme to deliverance plays through your head.

One of the shorter -but easily one of my favourite - Hornby Island winding roads leads to gin. And not just any gin... it leads to Captain (yes Captain - he's a retired ice-breaker Captain) Peter Kimmerly and the home of Phrog Gin.

Most distilled spirits are gleaned from starchy sugars like potatoes or from grains. According to Peter and his Organic Chemist-partner, these are the culprits responsible for hangovers and aftertaste. Peter starts all his alcohol production with organic sugar beets. Apparently sugar beet sugar produces the cleanest, purest alcohol from which you can create your spirits.

You also need a great bloody still (or in Peter's case, six of them) and some really, really cool technology. For instance, Peter's son is the Chief Engineer on a cruise ship. He built Peter a vacuum evaporator. His reasoning: If it can be used to distill 40,000 gallons of freshwater each day on a ship, a smaller one should be able to distill booze. When it's operating, it creates pressure so low, it's the equivalent to distilling alcohol, 4,000 above the summit of Mount Everest. That one step renders alcohol vapours so pure, they'd seduce even the most devout priest.

Peter's newest still is a work of art. Honestly, it's worth a trip to the Phrogery just to see the still. According to Peter it took two months to design, five month to be built by grey-haired, bearded Germans, deep in the Black Forest. It was shipped to Hornby in a seven foot long, five foot high crate and it must weigh two tons. It's a gleaming piece of functional art, rendered in hand-pounded copper and stainless steel. The cracking tower is seven feet tall!

So, what comes out of all this science, heart and dedication to purity?

Phrog's spirits are Gin, Vodka, Hollunderblutin (the aromatics are elderflower) and Aquavit (of which I'm not a huge fan - sorry Peter). And what spirits they are. To mix Phrog Vodka with anything, would be a crime. To even bring a Tonic water bottle near Phrog Gin; a sin. The Gin is served best at room temperature at 2/3 gin, 1/3 water.

There are also two flavoured Vodkas - usually the death of all drinkers due to their sugars and artificial flavours. Not Phrogs. Peter's Vanilla Vodka gets its flavour from pure, scraped vanilla beans. The Black Jelly Bean Sichuan Vodka (yes you read that correctly - roll it around in your brain a while) is flavoured with star anise and hot, red Thai, chilli peppers. There is nothing synthetic in the mix. Imagine the purest licorice taste with a small alcohol kick. Swallow it and wait a fraction of a second for the chilli pepper to hit you. It's subtle, but it's there and it is fantastic.

And, while we brought home a bottle of gin and a bottle of Black Jelly Bean Sichuan Vodka, I've since learned that I may be able to buy them in town; unlike Tofino Brewing Company's Tuff Session Ale - another story for another day.

Peter's Island Spirits Distillery, home of the Phrogery and all things related to creating the best booze on the planet, is but one of the many winding roads on Hornby. At the top of the mountain, up the long winding, gravel road, you'll find the Meadery (we ascended to them last year). You'll find Ford's Cove marina and great fish and chips at the end of the long road that winds across the island.

So, the next time you find yourself facing the choice of the straight path or the winding road, go the long way around. To paraphrase John and Paul: The long and winding road, will never disappear. And, you never know what - or who - you'll find.

Well at Least it's an Excuse to Stay Away from Calgary

Things I loathe in no particular order:

• Big cities
• Crowds
• Cowboys
• Country music
• Commercialization

I also completely and utterly, without apology, unrepentantly despise the City of Calgary. So you can imagine how thrilled I am to have absolutely no reason to go to Calgary this week. Beyond my normal desire to escape that urban hellhole every time I have to visit it, Stampede week makes the merely unbearable completely torturous.

We've lived in Alberta for 11 years now and I take it as a point of pride that I've never been to Stampede. There is so much that is great about living in Alberta: The mountain parks, amazing rivers, genuinely nice people and close proximity to BC are among it's salient features. We've made some of our best friends here and, while I still can't consider Alberta "home" it is a damn nice place to live.

But for one week (10 days? How long is this damn thing anyways?) every year, Southern Alberta loses its collective mind. All of a sudden every suburbanite commuter becomes a damn cowboy. Pancakes become a food group and competitive pancake-breakfast rallying seems to become Calgary's semi-official sport. Every damn radio station becomes Stampede-obsessed. I think, that if I printed this diatribe in the Calgary Sun, I might actually have a by-law officer visit my house for a "chat" and demand to know why I wasn't in "Stampede spirit". And I don't even live in Calgary.

This isn't about animal cruelty or the perception thereof. It's not about having to put down horses every year or about cowboys getting stepped on by bulls - although if I was a bull I know what I'd try to do.

I guess I just don't "get it". And I know that there are plenty of people who love the Stampede who would kindly - or not so kindly - tell me that they don't need me down there anyways. And that's fine. Enjoy the Stampede. Enjoy the crowds and the pushing and jostling. Enjoy the parking nightmares. Enjoy cheap pancakes served on non-biodegradable foam plates. Enjoy the sideshow. I'll stick to the places I love. Because of Stampede there are fewer people on the river and fewer in the mountains. I'll stay there.

Besides, there's less chance of being stepped on by a pancake-eating, country-music-singing, crowd-surfing, cowboy-ridden bull.

What's the Stupidest Way You Could Lose an Election

I've never loved cookies so much in my entire life.

If this is the kind of immaturity it takes to bring down the Stelmach government, then bring it on.