About ten years ago I did some work for the Smithsonian’s Museum of American History on a (now defunct) Collections Information System project. It wasn’t the best engagement - I spent quite a bit of time sitting in a cube with nothing to do - but I did get to spend some time looking around the various museum building and talking to the people that worked there. However, I was struck by the dedication of the employees to the mission of the Institute which is to promote “innovation, research and discovery in science”.

Slightly after this timeframe (after we had moved back to Akron and had money again), I subscribed to two of the magazines published by the Institute - Air&Space and Smithsonian, and also own numerous of their books.

I mention all this in order to provide a background for the level of irritation and dismay that I felt when I read this article on the New York Times website. To summarize, the Smithsonian was going to allow the Discovery Institute to use it’s facilities to screen a movie called The Privileged Planet for a donation of $16,000.

Why did this bother me? Let me digress a bit….

For those of you not aware the Discovery Institute (website here http://www.discovery.org/) is one of the leading proponents of Intelligent Design (or ID) theory. If you’re not hip to the new slang, this is pretty much Creationism v2.0 - I believe that the thought here is to make it sound “more scientific” by calling it Intelligent Design. But what it really comes down to is the Old Testament version of events regarding the creation of the earth. Part of the whole “bible is the absolute authority on everything” bit that the fundamentalists get off on.

The Discovery Institute (along with many other conservative religious groups) would like this to be taught in schools as an “alternative” to the theory of evolution. I have a problem with this since to me the bible (or any other religious text) depends on faith over fact; whereas science is concerned with facts that can be proved. But that just my view on it.

So back to the Smithsonian - in my opinion (and I’m not alone - numerous sites picked up on this as well), allowing the Discovery Institute to screen a pseudo-scientific “documentary” such as The Privileged Planet along with the customary co-sponsorship of the Smithsonian (based on the rules of the Smithsonian) is a bad idea for multiple reasons. First, because it goes against the very mission of the Smithsonian - ID is not science - to date no papers supporting ID have been published in peer-reviewed journals. Secondly, by showing it at the Smithsonian the ID faction can claim that the Smithsonian supports ID, as they would be implicitly co-sponsoring the work. Finally, the act of showing this film at an Institution widely associated with science give the ID myth a thicker veneer of fact and scientific legitimacy.

In righteous indignation then I picked up my pen (well, actually opened up a new email - but the first bit sounded better) and pounded out a quick email to the Smithsonian in which I stated in part:

The mission statement for the institution claims that the Smithsonian seeks to promote “innovation, research and discovery in science”. However, I find that this mission is totally incompatible with this “documentary” on Intelligent Design…

Give the Smithsonian credit - after about a week I read a few notes on the web indicating that the Smithsonian was taking the matter into consideration, and then I saw a wire report that they were going to return the $16,000 donation and remove the customary “co-sponsored by the Smithsonian Institute” tag from the event. The also followed up my email with this reply, reproduced in it’s entirety below:

Your correspondence regarding the screening of “Privileged Planet” has been forwarded to the Smithsonian’s Public Inquiry Mail Service for response.

The Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History recently approved a request by the Discovery Institute to hold a private, invitation only screening and reception at the Museum on June 23 for the film “The Privileged Planet.” Upon further review we have determined that the content of the film is not consistent with the mission of the Smithsonian Institution’s scientific research. Neither the Smithsonian Institution nor the National Museum of Natural History supports or endorses the views of the Discovery Institute or the film “The Privileged Planet.” Given that the Discovery Institute has already issued invitations, we will honor the commitment made to provide space for the event, but will not participate or accept a donation for it.

We appreciate your interest in the Smithsonian Institution and support of its programs.

Given that the Smithsonian is a public institution one may argue that this is a violation of the free speech of the ID crowd and the Discovery Institute. However, I don’t find that to be the case - the Smithsonian specifically denies religious and political events from being hosted on it’s facilities, including screening of films. Since this is a religious event (what else would you classify it as), I believe it’s fair to exclude it on those grounds.

So the end result is that the film will be shown at the NMNH (National Museum of Natural History), as the Smithsonian has agreed to honor their commitment to provide space, but the Smithsonian will not be accepting a donation nor will they participate in the event. This doesn’t entirely thrill me, but I think that the Smithsonian is doing the best with a bad situation, and I have replied to their email noting this.

One final thought - in researching this post I can across an site that included this quote from John Locke (English Philosopher 1632-1704). I’m thinking that this sums up the ID argument in a nutshell:

Every sect as far as reason will help them, gladly use it; when it fails them, they cry out it is a matter of faith, and beyond reason.

I always knew that my Grandfather Schmidt served on a ship during WWII, but it was only in the past decade or so that I realized it wasn’t a Navy ship that he served on, but rather an Army ship.

Recently we’ve been spending most of the time when we are together talking about his experiences during the war on the ships USAMP Joseph Henry and USAMP Gen. Absalom Baird. Both of these ships were Army mineplanters, which were also equipped to lay cable. In the case of the Henry the majority of her work was cable laying in the Atlantic.

My Grandfather was a Navigational Officer on both of these vessels, responsible for making sure the ship went where it was supposed to. We’ve talked about the perils of navigation on the ocean quite a bit in the last few months in light of this accident involving the USS San Francisco. To illustrate a point about the accuracy of the charts in use (many of which are based on 100 to 150 year old data from old surveys) he removed some charts of the Grand Bahamas from a bookshelf. I was surprised to find that these were the very same charts he had used 60 years earlier to chart the course of the Joseph Henry on a mission to lay an underwater hydrophone for a test program ordered by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It was a strange feeling, holding a piece of forgotten history in my hands. Not to mention a piece of my grandfather’s life that I was just beginning to know more about.

I decided to do some research on the ships that he served on, starting with the internet and heading down to the library if need be. I had last attempted this a few years ago (after my father retouched some pictures for my grandfather), but that time I had struck out. However, I was in luck this time - I happened across this excellent site which goes into some depth on the subject of the Army “Ghost Fleet” of WWII. Author Ramon Jackson provides a nice summary as to why I’ve been having such a hard time finding information on these ships:

I used the term “Ghost Fleet” after some thought. I was not fully aware of the fleet size and variety in Army vessels during the war years even with a long interest in World War II, ships and very extensive reading. I was even less aware of the extent of the Army’s role at sea and with ships going back to early days. In researching ships I’ve personally known I became struck by the number with Army origins and backgrounds. There was hardly a trace of what I was discovering had been a very large fleet. There are many “forgotten” fleets not given due credit. None I know of being so termed are quite so large and have such extensive history. The glimpses of the Army’s Second World War fleet were flickers, not quite solid — ghostly. The material does exist. It just does not find its way into extensive circulation and is not the subject of popular writing.

I spent a fascinating few hours reading through this site, learning more about the Army’s role in costal operations than I had in reading dozens of books on WWII. Then I saw this page on the site which made me stop and catch my breath:

Aris Bilalis, a ship researcher in Greece, was asking if I knew dates for some of the Signal Corps cable ships. Joseph Henry came into the exchange. Then it clicked. Joseph Henry was known to have ended up in Greece as a cable ship. Aris suddenly came back with the fact that Thales o Milisios, the ship’s new name, wasn’t among those fading away at all:

When I read your mail I understood why the name “Joseph Henry” seemed familiar to me.

She became a cable ship for the Greek state-owned communications OTE under the name Thalis o Milisios (ie., Thales the Militian [from Militos]). She was active into the eighties when she was to be sold for scrap. However she was saved and is now anchored in the Maritime Museum at Faliro, Athens.

So the Joseph Henry still floated, and better yet was part of a Maritime Museum! The site was accompanied by a picture (on the right)

I recognized the ship from pictures that my grandfather has, as well as a pencil drawing of the ship he has framed in his basement. Reading through the site further, I found yet another picture - this one of the USAMP General Absalom Baird taken back in the early ’30s. This is another ship that my grandfather served on. This ship spent most of it’s time planting mines from Maine down through Boston and around Portsmouth and Norfolk during the war.

This ship was very similar to the pictures I have seen of the Henry, due to the fact (most likely - I know very little about this) that they are from the same class, laid down in the early 20th century (1909 based on what I have read).

It was very exciting for me to call my grandfather with this news - I let him know about the Henry, and where it was docked. I read for him large parts of the website and promised to print the bulk of it off and bring it in with me the next time I visit him and my grandmother. He also told me to offer his services to the researchers who are working on the website in order to help fill the gaps in their knowledge.

The last part was of particular interest to me - in reading through this site, and taking in some of the themes and comments I get the impression that not very much is known about the Henry and the missions that it undertook. The role of the Army Mine Planter Service (AMPS) centers around the planting of mines for harbor and costal defense. Unlike the mines portrayed in movies like The Incredible Mr. Limpet and Finding Nemo, these mines were not proximity or contact mines, but rather were controlled by personnel on shore through the use of control boards, control boxes, and cables that ran to the mines. This requirement (to run cables to the mines and control boxes) is why the various ships used as mine planters were built with the capability to lay cable.

In the case of the Henry, this became her primary duty. Of all the work he did during the war, my grandfather talks most about a mission undertaken near the end of the war, under the auspices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

At that time, the Army Air Corps was experiencing B-29 losses over the Japanese home islands and the various approaches. As he tells it, at that time the pilots and crew were the priority - the AAF could replace the planes, but the crews were another story. Submarines were being used to pluck the crews out of the water, but there was still a need to direct the subs to the crew.

Enter the Henry. In 1945, a project was undertaken where hydrophones would be placed on the seafloor. The B-29’s would carry a small bomb to be exploded if the plane had to ditch in the water, and the resulting explosion would be picked up by the hydrophone which then would be able to triangulate a location for the downed plane.

I need to confirm with my grandfather, but my understanding is that this project never moved beyond the test stage. This was more due to the capture of frontline airstrips such as Iwo Jima more than a problem with the process. I believe that the Henry did successfully place a hydrophone on the seafloor - my grandfather does have charts of the Grand Bahamas showing such an operation.

Hopefully, I will be able to write some additional information on this post as I find out more.

I came to important realization the other night while at baseball with Alex, the fact that I’m a fortunate man. I had this epiphany during the 4th inning of Alex’s baseball game last Monday in Coventry, while coaching in left field.

I had just got done moving Alex over a bit to the right to cover more of the outfield (we were missing a few players to vacation) and he looked up to me and smiled and told me that “he just loved me”. At that point I thought to myself how great this was - not only was I getting to spend time with my son, I was actually getting coach him. To help him learn how to play baseball, to learn how to compete, to learn how to be coached, and to learn how to be part of a team. Me. Again, I’m a fortunate man.

Alex made several good plays in the outfield, and managed to go 4 for 4 that night, and drove in the tying runs in the bottom of the 6th inning. I was coaching third base and I waved the tying runs in - a few minutes later I tried to wave him home for the win on Matthew’s triple, but he was tagged out. No worries - he did what I asked him to do. He put his head down and ran hard. And he was on the bench when Matthew scored on Jo-Jo’s triple to win the game.

Winning the game was nice, but the best part of the day was seeing how happy Alex was - this was probably his best day in baseball in the last three years. This has been my best year as a coach, as well - it’s been great to work with the kids and see them get better and better as the season went on. The coaches - David, Mike, Carl, Donnie, and Chris - were great to work with.

I’m sad that the season is over - like every year, the kids seem to just be hitting their stride as the season ends. I’m looking forward to seeing them on future football and baseball teams, as well as at school.

2005 Manchester Indians
Alex
Joey
Dante
Jo-Jo
Kyle
Brian
Vince
Tony
Dalton
Matthew
Cory
Luke
David

This was one of the articles in my bloglines feed this morning:
Wired News: Microsoft Censors Chinese Blogs

This article discusses how Microsoft is working with the Chinese government to adjust it’s web portal to remove words that the government in Beijing finds objectionable - words like “democracy” and “human rights”, amongst others. This isn’t anything new - there have been posts to slashdot and other sites over the last several years about big tech companies (Cisco is another that springs to mind) who actively assist in the censorship of information flowing into or out of China.

The question for me is “should an ethical and responsible company be doing this?” Is this a case of “business is business” or do they have a ethical and moral obligation to stand up for the same principals that we are trying to bring about in the middle east?

I don’t have an answer for this, but the question does bear some thought.

I’m guessing that most people are going to have no clue about the title to this post - but just wait and see. In the next 3-6 months everyone is going to know Mike Buckley.

Well, at least I hope so.

Mike is a very, very funny guy that I used to work with back in the Olive Garden days, and is also one of the most creative people I’ve ever had the pleasure to know. He could take the most mundane, stupid situation and make some observation or joke about it that would have you laughing with tears in your eyes.

I last mentioned Mike back in this post back on the 14th of September last year. At that time he told us that he had an agreement in place to publish a series of books that he had written (well, three books based on his email - I guess that makes it a series). Last night he sent out an email to a group of us that read, in part:

I wanted to let you all know about the big news in my life. I wrote a book. I actually wrote three, but the first one is coming out in October. It’s being published by Harry N. Abrams (yes, this is a real publisher - they do Babar and Hello Kitty). It’s a middle-grade fiction series for ages 8-12.

Mike goes on a bit further to describe the whirlwind publicity trip that he will be on to support this release in October, and includes the URL to a website his publisher has setup to promote the book here.

Beth and I are pretty excited by this, as not only is Mike a good guy and a friend of ours but from what we have seen the series looks really good. I’m excited because this is the sort of book that Alex is becoming very fond of lately - it will definitely be something we read before bed for a few weeks.

Pre-order of the book can be done here through Amazon - I’m too lazy to get the corresponding link from Barnes and Noble.

“The Sisters Grimm: The Fairy-Tale Detectives - Book #1″ (Michael Buckley)