Intro

It's time for a reality check ...

Maybe we’ve reached the point of diminishing astonishment.

But I suspect that much of what we’re hammered with every day really doesn’t make much of an impact on most of us anymore. We’ve heard the same stories too often. We’ve been exposed to the same issues for so long without any meaningful resolution. We recognize that reality is rapidly becoming malleable, primarily in the hands of whoever has the biggest microphone. How else can we explain a society where myth asserts itself as reality, based entirely how many hits it gets online?

We know that many of the “issues” as defined are pure crapola, hyped by politicians on both sides pandering to “the will of the people,” which is still more crapola. Inevitably, it’s not the will of all the people they reflect, but the will of relatively small groups of people with disproportionate political influence.

Nobody wants to face up to the realities of the issues. Nobody wants to say what’s right or wrong – even when it’s obvious and there are numbers to back it up. Most of us are afraid to bring up the realities for fear of being accused of being insensitive or downright mean.

So we say nothing. Until now.

It’s time for a reality check on the fundamentals – much of which is common knowledge to many of us, already. But it might be comforting to know you are not alone …

Monday, March 10, 2014

Daylight Saving Time ...

The “spring forward, fall back” nonsense always infuriates me. 

I’m a reasonably intelligent guy but I’ve yet to understand why we do this.  There’s absolutely no rational reason I’ve ever seen for setting our clocks back an hour in the fall, and then forward an hour in spring. 

Proponents claim it gives people more daylight hours.  They also claim it saves energy. 

What it really does is to compel folks in the afflicted time zones to run around and reset every clock, watch and device dependent on a clock twice a year. And for what?  So they can screw up their circadian rhythm for a few days? 

Honestly, there’s no point to this.  Some NY politician first brought up this idea for the U.S., which shouldn’t really surprise anyone. It was stupid when it started and remains stupid today. 

Hate to burst everybody’s bubble, but the number of daylight hours has nothing to do with setting your clocks forward or back.  There are always fewer hours of sunlight each day as we head into winter; then the number of hours of sunlight each day increases as we head out of winter.

There’s real science behind why that happens, but one thing’s for certain – changing your watches and clocks has nothing to do with it. 

So it’s always been a dumb idea.  But leave it to Congress to make it even dumber. 

It was bad enough when we all accepted when this futile illusion would begin and end.  Makers of electronic devices used this predictability to preprogram a wide range of devices so they would automatically change their displays for us.

Then, not long ago, actually with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, bureaucrats and politicians decided to change the start and stop dates. Why?  No idea.  I suspect nobody in Congress did either.  The net result was to start DST a little earlier and end it a bit later.  (It now starts the second Sunday of March, and ends the first Sunday of November – just for the record.)

So now DST is about 4-5 weeks longer than it used to be.  Woo-hoo.  Don’t you feel better knowing that your government can control the number of daylight hours there are, and has decided to give you more of them?  Well, where’s your gratitude? 

Of course all those devices preprogrammed with original start/stop dates now have to be manually set.  But that’s a small price to pay for more daylight hours, right? 

Now, if we ended this madness what would happen?  Would schoolchildren have to trick-or-treat in the dark again? Would energy consumption soar?  What about school kids waiting in the dark for their school bus?   

Will all Hell break loose?

Nope.  Just look at Arizona.  They’re not on DST.  And they seem to be doing quite nicely without it.  As we would.   


No comments:

Post a Comment