Belrad Universe, February 18, 2008 - Transcript

Get more at www.BelradUniverse.com

It's February 18^th, 2008, I'm your host, Bryan Belrad, and this is Belrad Universe, the only live talk show with a carbon footprint of zero. We bring you one hour of the most interesting news and ideas - information that you probably could live without, but would be a much lesser person for it.

You can reach us by email at Show@BelradUniverse.com, and we look forward to hearing from you.

It's 8 after the hour, and I hope you're enjoying your long President's Day weekend.

Boy, if this audience keeps growing like this, I'm going to have to upgrade my server! We've got so much traffic, it's ridiculous.

Ok, it's not ridiculous, it's actually pretty good, and thank you to everybody for visiting the website, www.BelradUniverse.com. We had over 100,000 unique visitors last week, so we're... You know, it was just a couple of weeks ago, I was excited over 10,000, and ... oh my goodness, it's just incredible! But, on the flip side, we're chewing through bandwidth like a baseball team goes through steroids, so we're gonna need a bigger server here pretty soon.

So... we're now taking bids for advertising. You can have your ad right on the website, or here on the show. Contact us at Show@BelradUniverse.com.

Now, without further ado, here's the top news of the week that you haven't heard about:

Judge sentences man, then marries him

It was a bittersweet Valentine's Day for Kevin Felder and Misty Johnson. Just minutes after Judge James Mazzone sentenced Felder to 5 to 18 years for robbery, he personally performed a marriage ceremony for the couple.

Felder was convicted of stealing $340 from a convenience store. Though the crime seems rather minor, Felder was already on probation for a domestic violence crime against his soon-to-be bride.

While one might be tempted to ask, 'What was she thinking?' of the bride, being that her newly-wed husband has already been convicted of abusing her, and is now off to prison for a long stay, one must also wonder what he was thinking. Not only did he marry the girl that pressed charges against him - and stayed with him through that - but that very day, he'd already been given one lengthy sentence. That Felder voluntarily added a 'ball and chain' to his predicament forces one to question the sanity of both members of the 'happy couple'.

Ghostbuster hired to deal with Stalking Sewer Zombie

Employees of a sewage plant in East Sussex are scared witless by the strange appearance of a "humanoid figure" that stalks them through the tunnels.

To deal with the problem, workers hired Michael Kingscote, a parapsychologist.

The investigation proved inconclusive, however, owing to the presence of strong electromagnetic fields in the tunnels themselves. Strong fields can make a person feel as though they are being watched, or even being touched by something that is not there.

Naked Cowboy Sues

Robert Burck has made his living for the last several years by giving live guitar shows in Times Square - in nearly nothing at all.

Calling himself 'The Naked Cowboy', his trademark attire is a pair of western-style boots and a cowboy hat, with nothing in between but a pair of tidy whities (due to public nudity laws). He even carries a white guitar to complete the look.

He's become something of a celebrity in recent years, with several television appearances, including one audition for American Idol.

And now the cowboy is all riled up.

He's suing Mars Incorporated, the company that makes M&Ms candies, for $6.5 million, claiming that they stole his look for a Times Square billboard.

The ad in question bears a blue personification of the chocolate treats in a remarkably similar outfit to the cowboy's, right down to the white guitar.

However, the ad was designed by a firm in Ohio, so it may be that the creators were ignorant of the Cowboy's "brand image."

New Yorkers declined comment when asked if Burck also melts in your mouth, but not in your hand.

80 year old puts attackers in hospital

Another cowboy came out swinging this week.

James Pickett, an 80 year old from Texas, was beset by a pair of masked malefactors, intent on mugging an easy victim. Boy did they pick the wrong guy.

Pickett is a World War II vet, a retired firefighter, and a life-long John Wayne fanatic.

To keep this G-rated, we'll just say that Pickett was the faster draw.

Paul and Holden Perry, the assailants, were sent running like the proverbial yellow-dog-with-his-tail-between-his-legs. They didn't get far, and were soon hauled off by ambulance.

Said Pickett of the incident: "I'm a better shot," and, "They best not come back."

The reason the brothers managed to get away, still needing the services of an ambulance (as opposed to a Hearse)? "I run out of bullets."

State Rep calls 'Crack Tax' unfair

New York Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry has a problem with Governor Eliot Spitzer's proposal to collect sales tax on the illegal drug trade: It's unfair to the drug dealers.

He said, "This component adds another financial hardship on people who don't have a lot of money."

Additional criticism of the so-called 'crack tax' include the valid point that drug dealers are already breaking the law by selling illegal drugs; why would they hesitate to fail to send the state its cut of the proceeds?

Also, there is the minor matter of said drugs still being illegal, so any dealer that did pay up would also be tipping off the authorities to his/her presence, and, in turn, be risking the confiscation of his/her entire inventory, and probably be awarded a lovely set of silver bracelets to go with a nice long-term vacation package.

In light of these trifling matters, it's easy to see how Assemblyman Aubry's worries of hardship should take precedence.

Mom whores out daughter for rent

Also in New York, a Binghamton woman is facing charges of whoring out her own daughter.

Linda O'Connor, 46, allegedly rented her 12 year old daughter out for sex with strangers twice in 2006 and 2007, and also gave her to her landlord, Dean Sacco of New Jersey, on several occasions, in lieu of a rent payment. The latter assaults were photographed by the loving mother; the former, to drum up some money to take the child Christmas shopping.

Because of the photographs, O'Connor is also facing pornography charges, and could be sentenced to life in prison.

And another crazy mom story:

Mother throws baby while calling 911 on herself

A new mother from Plano, Texas was indicted by a Grand Jury for child abuse.

Padmaja Enjeti, a 38 year old, allegedly dropped her 22 month old daughter from a 2nd story balcony on purpose. Then, she did it again - while talking to a 911 emergency dispatcher.

Fortunately, the child did not suffer serious injury, and is presently in her father's care.

Enjeti's attorneys say that she has been suffering from schizophrenia since the baby's birth. She has been ordered into treatment while awaiting trial.

We'll be right back.

(break)

Welcome back to Belrad Universe.

This week is a potent one in history. In fact, our top 'today in history' item is also our main science story for this week. It's the first anniversary of my very first book

One year ago, in February of 2007, a book came out that challenged everything we thought we knew about how our universe came to be. "Testing the Big Bang" questioned the century-old dominant theory of scientific creation - the first work ever to examine ALL the evidence behind the theory objectively - and found it lacking.

Starting with the three main items of evidence, "Testing the Big Bang" begins by examining the prediction of the chemical composition of the universe, the interpretations of the Cosmic Microwave Background, and the observed Cosmological Redshift.

To summarize, the universe's matter doesn't matter; the predictions were borrowed from Steady State Theory, and every other theory has essentially the same numbers. This prediction does not support the Big Bang.

Second, the CMB only meets a few of the requirements for the 'afterglow' of the Big Bang, which it is purported to be. It fails many, many more tests.

Finally, the book shows how the redshift isn't a prediction either; it's the starting observation, and, what's more, the observations we've made don't add up to a Big Bang universe - or even an expanding one.

Then, the book continues, addressing other issues like Olber's Paradox and the viability of metric expansion. There's even more, including a critique of modern science for holding such religious-esque biases in the face of clear, irrefutable facts.

For more information, pick up your copy through Amazon, Lulu, or most of the major bookstores. Happy anniversary, and happy learning!

Also in history, today in 1564, the legendary artist Michelangelo died. In 1861, Jefferson Davis was inaugurated as the only President of the Confederate States of America. In 1863, the bombardment of Vicksburg began. And in 1930, Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto at the age of 24.

Also in science, remember that satellite I mentioned at the beginning of the month? Well, the government has been spurred into action by YOUR response. Just the other day, it was announced that the Navy has been ordered to shoot it out of the sky.

This will be the first attempt in American history to blast a satellite still in orbit.

It sounds like a lot of fun, but, I seem to recall that last year we were giving the Chinese hell for doing exactly the same thing. I guess it isn't hypocrisy if we're the ones doing the shooting. Ah, well.

This past weekend, astronomer Michael Meyer presented new data at the American Association for the Advancement of Science that indicates planets like Earth might be far more common than previously thought.

Using new readings from the Spitzer Space Telescope, Meyer's team has put together the most detailed study of planetary disks around sun-like stars ever assembled. Based on that information, he believes that fair-sized rock-planets might form in the 'life zone' around stars like ours between 20 to 62% of the time.

If the middle ground turns out the be the truth, then we're looking at something along the lines of 250 million plus potentially habitable neighbors right here in our own galaxy.

What's more, given life's propensity to crop up in any way, shape, or form that it can, it seems almost impossible that every one of those lovely little balls of dirt could be empty.

So, for those of you keeping score, that means we've got company!

Meanwhile, while this astronomer's star rises, another legend's has set forever. Robert Jastrow, one of NASA's pioneers, has passed away at 82.

Famous for breaking with his brethren, and leading the way onto the public stage, Jastrow made numerous appearances on CBS and NBC during the lunar missions. His ability to explain scientific concepts in a way that was not only understandable, but interesting, eventually led to him hosting over 100 programs on CBS about space and other scientific matters.

His best-selling book, "Red Giants and White Dwarfs," made the case of the need for humanity to explore outer space. He wrote many, many other books, articles, and even helped found the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Among many other accomplishments, Jastrow spent his latter years caring for the famed Mt. Wilson Observatory, where the legendary telescope that Edwin Hubble used to prove that our Milky Way was only one small piece of a limitless universe is housed.

We are grateful for having known his company, and, whether we know it or not, all our lives are far richer for his contribution. God rest his soul.

Another sad tale comes to us just today from Indonesia. There, officials have announced that a 3 year old boy in Jakarta has become the 105^th human to die from the avian flu in that country. It seems that the virus making the jump into humans isn't that large of a leap anymore... Many worry that it's now only a matter of time before a strain of the virus breaks loose, and spreads rampant through the tightly packed Asian populations.

There are no official numbers available on recovery rates for victims of the bird flu.

We'll be right back. (break)

Ok, this past weekend, former President Bill was out making the rounds for Hillary. At a rally in Ohio, he was confronted by a group of Pro-Life students, and, Bill being the political master he is, soundly thwumped them.

Here's what he said: (sound clip: "If you were really pro-life, you would want to put every doctor, and every mother, as an accessory to murder, in prison - and you won't say you wanna do that 'cuz you know you wouldn't have a lick of political support.")

That's why he's the grand-master of politicians! Did you notice how subtley he slipped his non-sequitur in? Did you catch it?

Let's hear it one more time. Listen closely, now: (sound clip)

Did you catch it? He just told the pro-lifers what they believe. He redirected the issue away from the morality of abortion itself to some inferred kind of vengeance against those who have been a party to abortions. He's made them into some kind of absolutist fringe, who want to punish women, and keep them down.

He even threw in "all mothers", making the pro-life position out to be an attack against all women. But, if you abort your baby, do you still count as a mother?

I understand, abortion is a very sensitive issue. Passions are inflamed on both sides. On the one hand, you've got people who care deeply about the lives of others, and don't want to see innocent children executed for no other crime than the irresponsibility of their would-be parents. Ironically, these are often the same people who believe using a condom is wrong - go figure.

On the other hand, you've got people who believe that no government policy should ever be able to so much as restrict the personal liberty of any individual - even if that liberty means allowing some women the "freedom" to commit murder as the result of a whim.

But, I'm getting into rhetoric myself. The irony on this side is that pro-choicer folk are also generally members of groups that support gun control and anti-speech laws. But they don't want personal freedom limited. Again, go figure.

In all fairness, Bill does raise a good point, later on in the speech, that politicians on both sides have generally supported legislation that reduces the need for abortions, and nobody can argue that that's a bad thing.

However, to imply that to be a pro-lifer, one must want to throw "all mothers" in jail is absurd. He makes it out that anyone who says he or she is 'pro-life' is either a hypocrite, for not wanting to throw "all mothers" in jail, or a wing-nut for wanting to do just that.

But, Bill, it's not about punishing women. Americans are the most forgiving people in the world. The north and south forgave each other the civil war, one of the bloodiest conflicts in history. The nation as a whole forgave England for the atrocities of our revolution. We've forgiven Germany and Japan for World War II.

We, as Americans, understand that people make mistakes. We don't want to throw everyone who voted for Bush - twice - into jail for treason. We learn from our errors, and we move on.

No real pro-life advocate wants to throw anyone in jail - they just want the deaths to stop. Whether it be through people finally taking responsibility for their own actions, or through government help programs, or whatever, it doesn't matter. They just want it to stop. That's it. It has nothing to do with "political support."

Pro-lifers realize that we're all human, we all make mistakes. People in dire straights panic, and do very stupid things. But following an act of negligence and irresponsibility with another desperate act is not really a very intelligent thing.

But, I digress. My point is that Bill set off my fallacy signal, and I felt compelled to clear up some of the resulting confusion. Just so we're all aware - we have our reasons for disagreement on this issue, but pro-lifers aren't out for vengeance. Their aim is to protect life, not punish those presently living for whatever mistakes they might have made.

In reality, a logical, thinking person knows that there has to be some kind of legal abortion in place, if only for medical reasons.

Consider: though most any mother would happily give up her own life, in order to save the life of her child, is it OUR place to make that decision for her? What if a pregnant woman is afflicted with some terrible malady, and is left with that unbearable choice: her life, or the baby's?

Most people generally assume that the child should take precedence. But, why? What makes a baby more valuable than its mother? The fact that it's younger? Come on!

At what age does a life become worth less than another? Where do you draw the line? Should a 12 year old die so that a 6 year old might live?

At what age does life stop mattering? 21? 18? 10? At what age has a person already 'spent' his or her chance to make a difference?

I had children young, and everyone assumed I was done, over-with, caput. That I had taken all the potential of my future, and flung it carelessly into the toilette.

Yet, here I am today, hosting the fastest-growing national talk show in America. I wrote two books last year - one of them upsetting one of the dominant scientific theories of our time, the other hailed as one of the best works of fiction ever written - produced hundreds of articles, and have won truckloads of awards.

And I'm just getting warmed up.

So, please, somebody tell me - when does a life lose its chance to make a difference in the world? Where do we draw the line?

Yes, the baby might well grow up and cure some dreadful illness. But, it might also become the next Hitler. And the mother's own impact on the world cannot be understated: what if she has other children? More to the point, she can make a difference now, today. She is already well acquainted with the ways of the world, and won't need years just to be potty-trained. Does all that experience, all that knowledge, and all that potential have no meaning at all?

When we arbitrarily state that any life somehow has less value than any other, not based on individual qualities, but generalizations about people as members of groups, then we accomplish nothing but de-value the worth of ALL life. We throw away something of value, no matter which we pick. And who, indeed, are we to decide which is the right choice?

We'll be right back.

(break).

And we're back. In this segment, I like to go over some of the letters you've all sent in since the last broadcast.

You can send your questions, comments, odd news stories, and ideas to Show@BelradUniverse.com, and we look forward to hearing from you. It's your contribution that keeps this ball rolling!

Here's some of the goodies from the mailbag today:

Alan of Phoenix, NY writes:

Why do people disagree for it's own sake? I remember watching the state of the union address, and Bush is standing there, giving his speech. The Republicans stand almost every time he stops talking, the Democrats stand about a third of the time, and lots of clapping. However, I noticed that both Hillary and Obama were sitting down several times that Bush was espousing the very kinds of things they've been calling for in their primary campaigning. What's the deal? It's like they get that "I can't like that" look on their face just because it's a Republican saying it, not because of what he said. It makes me wonder if either of them really mean anything they've been saying, or if they just try, as usual, to be as oppositional to the president as possible. This kind of thing makes me sick of the two party system. What ever happened to the idea of compromise for the sake of the whole?

Well, there's a whole lot going on there. For starters, I can't really comment about who was sitting or standing or what, because, like most everyone in the business, I don't watch the State of the Union. I read a transcript the next day. Who has time for all that clapping?

Anyway, as to your point, I really don't think that the spatial positioning of any of the candidates has anything to do with party politics - I think that if they didn't cheer their own points that it wasn't because a Republican was saying it, but because BUSH was saying it.

Even when he says something rational - or even a good idea - it is hardly an original thought. It's more like hearing an echo. Of course, the same could be said of most politicians...

Finally, you've got to look at the flip side of things. Did the Republicans cheer when Bush plagiarized one of Barack's points because they agree? Or did they cheer for him just because he's a Republican?

Party politics is a two way street, and it makes me sick. But, really, would a three-or-more party system be any better? Cheer your own guy, boo the rest. And I'm sincerely afraid of what would happen under a one-party system. Oooo.

Barbara of the Louisiana writes:

A little while ago, I GOOGLED mortgage crisis and came across your 

WELL-WRITTEN article: "Credit where credit is due"

She writes a very long letter, but, to spell it out, she's been doing research on mortgage fraud for a very long time now, and has put up a website to show the world. She's also running into trouble from the banks, owing, in no small part, to her exposing of their deep dark secrets, like the law firm that racked up a quarter mil in fees foreclosing on an $80,000 house - then split the plunder with the foreclosing bank.

We'll have more from Barbara as soon as I have the time to finish reading all the info she's sent me. For the time being, her website is www.lawgrace.org Check it out for lots of useful - and scary - information.

Jim from Utah writes: "Isn't Valentine's Day just another holiday like Halloween, invented by the mega-corporations just to sell candy?"

Well, Jim, in today's world, where gigantic corporations can steal your home and take away everything you hold dear, throwing all the laws of the land to the winds, while you're left helpless by a government that won't enforce its own laws on such big-time campaign contributors, it's easy to see the dark specter of greed in even the most joyful occasions.

Yet, with the possible exception of 'send a greeting card day', none of our major holidays were created specifically for the means of promoting any industry's sales.

As I mentioned last week, Valentine's Day exists because of Saint Valentine, and the miracle his loving spirit bestowed on his blind beloved. The first 'sweetheart' style valentine was recorded as being delivered in the 15^th century, long before those candy hearts were invented.

Likewise, Halloween is a real holiday too. In fact, it is the oldest holiday tradition celebrated in the United States.

To summarize, because so many people listening out there have heard all this before, Halloween started as a pre-Christian sort of New Year celebration, when the spirits of the ancestors crossed the veil between the world of the living and the world of the dead.

In more recent centuries, as Christianity spread, the young church did like many other successful religions, and adapted the holidays of its converts. Samhein became "All Hallow's Eve", as in "Hallowed Ground", and the following morning was renamed "All Saint's Day." It's probably not a bad idea to have a day for all the Saints together anyway, since there are more of them than days in a year.

The same thing happened with Christmas. The Bible is pretty clear that Jesus was born in the springtime, yet his birth is celebrated just after the Winter Solstice. Why? Because that's when the Pagans all welcomed the 'Return of the Sun.' See how clever that is?

Now, before we go, a big congratulations goes out to Mike and Macy, who got engaged on Valentine's Day. Now, that's the way to do it! Good luck to both of you, and little Skye too.

Well, that's all for this time. I'm Bryan Belrad, and this has been Belrad Universe. Until next week, stay safe, everyone.