A TRIBUTE TO EDDY, SR. (OR WHY SCIENCE WON'T SAVE YOUR SORRY ASS)

Eddy D. died a while back. Eddy D. Lawnmower, my good friend. Eddy D. Lawnmower was a lawnmower, you see, but then, I guess, so was I.

But, Eddy D. was the mechanical kind (with the gas powered engine) that I pushed. I pushed him a lot. We had a long row to mow.

I used to talk to Eddy, and as you can see, I even named him. I originally decided to name him so I could have fun telling stories of our exploits and facts about him to my children. You may immediately jump on this and say, "what a crazy old fool!" You may be right. You may also be a latter-day liberal who believes that guns kill people. Well, I tell you this: If guns can kill people, well then, my lawnmower can certainly have a name and a personality. He never killed anyone that I know (or didn't know, for that matter). He did like mayhem, however. No, he never told me so, but I could tell when he was happy.

We didn't always have a long row to mow. We had to start out small, and make our own lawn from a large area of tall grass interspersed with every kind of weed, nettles, thistle, and small cottonwood and alder trees, and other assorted brush. Eddy loved tearing into this jungle and tossing the broken and cut appendages to and fro. He hummed and sang as he worked. We carved gentility from wild abandon. Slowly but surely, we added to our row. (Every enviro-whacko should have an acre or two which they have to keep "manicured" so they can see how difficult it really is to beat nature).

The work was hard on Eddy. He was really a "city lawnmower." His wheels were small which made it tough for him on our uneven surfaces where many rocks and pieces of wood lurked. Many a time his blade was stopped cold by an unexpected encounter. Many other times he just spit these out with the rest of the stuff. Eddy was tough, but not strong. His carriage was proud, but weak. He was designed for "the easy life."

Eddy had several oxy-acetylene orthopedic surgeries to re-attach broken off wheels and other damage. He always went back to work immediately afterward. What a guy!

Finally, one sunny evening, his engine just gave out. Now there is another Eddy - - - Eddy., Jr., of course. So, that's why Eddy is Eddy, Sr. now.

Eddy, Jr. is a bit like his father. But, he has very large back wheels. It makes work much easier for him. There is another difference, and this difference is the reason for the last part of our title "Or Why Science Won't Save Your Sorry Ass!"

You see Eddy, Jr. has a 6.25 horsepower engine. I was shocked. Some of my problem is that I may have a partial "institutional memory." I think that may be what it is called. My first lawnmower had 3/4 of a horsepower. That's right, less than 1 horsepower. Eddy, Sr. had 3.5 horsepower, and I thought that was incredible for a lawnmower.

Incredible, that is, until I gave it a little bit of thought. "Overhead" is not free, nor is it cheap. It is also not non-corrupting (forgive the double negative and remember those advanced degrees and college loans, would you?). Somewhere in my archives is a piece I wrote about how the forcing of pollution devices onto cars was really a conspiracy to destroy the very popular Volkswagen Beetle with its "little engine that could." The idea being that the design was already optimized, and it had no room for adding overhead like an air conditioner or even power-robbing pollution control devices. Force the bug to go 55 mph and add overhead, and you can kill it. (Just try attacking a hill that you used to at 70 mph at only 55 mph. How fast will you be going at the top then? How fast will the big cars behind you be closing on you?). The Super Beattle was a doomed attempt to adapt. Can you kill a society by adding overhead?

Can you begin to guess why my first lawnmower was 3/4 hp and why Eddy, Sr. was 3.5 hp and Eddy, Jr. 6.25 hp?

Lawnmowers are on the environmentalists' list of evils. Have the emissions requirements for lawnmowers become more stringent or less? Do you have any idea what a "Power Curve" is? You may find it at Safeco Field or in Sports Illustrated's swimsuit issue, but that's not what I had in mind. Do you know what "de-tuning" means?

Did Eddy, Sr. have to produce more CO₂ than my first lawnmower? Does Eddy, Jr. have to produce even more?

Now, with a larger engine, I would expect there would have to be more in absolute terms, but I was thinking in relative terms, as a percentage of total emissions. That's what the "scientists" are looking at. They think they have reduced the harmful emissions (which they define as harmful) because they change the "mix" of emissions. The newer lawnmowers make more of what they consider to be good (they are wrong, by the way) in a relative way. In order to accomplish this, they have to make the engine bigger or it wouldn't then be able to do the work! When they make the engine bigger, the absolute amount of stuff out the exhaust pipe increases.

Is there also something else at work here? Environmentalists don't like lawnmowers. They don't like lawns. They want all lawns to be brown in the summertime despite the fact that brown grass cannot convert CO₂! I believe that they don't even like people who have lawns.

One of the things I have noticed is that the people who are attracting my ire have no sense of right or wrong, and they are capable of anything. They ruin things for others in order to get what they want. Could they be ruining the lawnmower, making them more harmful than necessary in order to prove their point? I believe that they have done this with the automobile and the diesel engine.

Why not the lawnmower?

I have an unconfirmed suspicion that spending hours behind Eddy, Jr. makes me feel a bit ill. I always try to mow only when there is a breeze, because I don't want to breathe any more exhaust than necessary. I am not going to experiment on myself, and I have shortened each outing to minimize my dosages. But, Eddy, Jr. has to expell more emissions than his predecessors. It is a given. Are those emissions more harmful with more CO₂ or not? My guess is yes, they are.

Now, this section of essays was to be more on fraud than CO₂, but sometimes the two are too closely intertwined and I don't know if I am adhering to my own restrictions or not. I guess not as this is a fraud not recognized in the media. Despite this, I believe I can save the day by now turning this little story into a reason for why there is so much fraud. That would fit my criteria. The reason involves "The Chinese Box."

Maybe that's not even the right name. I am referring to a "puzzle box" you may have seen as a child. A box that had certain panels you had to discover that could be pushed aside to reveal some other part that could be moved and so on. There was a "trick" to opening the box.

It is that way with almost everything these days. Only experts who know the "tricks" can deal with the complexities which they and their coherts have foisted upon us. If you believe this, then it shouldn't be hard to jump ahead to the next step - - - we have been creating too many experts! That's the reason for so much fraud. Too much "expert overhead." They need ways to cheat us in order to have money for all of them.

The lie about carbon dioxide, CO₂ is an excuse to turn the automobile and the lawnmower into a Chinese Box. Only experts can now work on them. Only experts can now design them. Makes them more expensive (My argument fails with lawnmowers. I believe they are cheaper now. Eddy, Jr. was more expensive than Eddy, Sr., but both were cheaper than my first power mower. Why, then, are cars more expensive? Perhaps you just can't add enough complexity to a lawnmower, or because they are just too cheap relative to the labor required to fix one that they are now disposables. I dunno). I think that I may be enticed to assert that the high cost of acquiring and maintaining a new automobile these days is another reason so many of us feel compelled to cheat.

We have gotten away from the idea that everyman can work on his own car or understand the law or whatever. We are forced to trust the experts, but experts only remain such when they can stay a step ahead of the crowd. This can be healthy in an open and truthful society. It is frighteningly opposite today. The experts blow smoke.

Science won't save your ass when the role of the scientist is to find new ways to bamboozle you. The scientist of today is more like the old ward politician who tries to get more like-thinkers on the city payroll using whatever ploy works. You have been betrayed for the sake of "full employment for experts technology." Trapped in a Chinese Box.

There is no secret panel to push to escape. You are stuck while they make the maze more complex. You are left nothing but to do their bidding.

Do you need more evidence? Then please explain what California is up to with the new legislation that they just passed requiring CO₂ vehicle emissions to be decreased by the year 2009 even when they recognize that this will do nothing significant (by their own admission) to decrease world-wide levels. Technological expenditures for the sake of technological expenditures, perhaps?

I guess I should jump in and say they really have their eyes on the local levels and the harm that local CO₂ is doing per my thesis, and they just don't want to let on that is the real reason. But, if so, that would be another fraud, wouldn't it?

(An alternative explanation is that Comrad-Governor Davis has so many large contributions from the likes of Adelphia, WorldCom, etc. that are under scrutiny that he needs his own "Wag the Dog" issue and, thus, this sorry attempt to heat up the environment pooch. Well, that bitch won't hunt even in California these days because so many are burned out there too. (Did I ever tell you how much I love the English Language)? If it is a "Wag the Dog," wouldn't that be fraud too? Or, it may just be an attempt to solidify his "greenie" base. But, if you have been reading many of these web pages, you should know by now that they are a fraud too. Aiding an abetting a fraud, eh, Comrad-Governor)?

Irregardless, your ass is grass, here com' d' lawnmower. (Sorry it won't be Eddy D. Lawnmower - - - Senior).

Are you ready?

Ready or not, bend over and kiss your ass goodbye. The experts, the "scientists" have a better idea for you. Don't get in the way.

Or else!

Or else, "Homeland Security!"

You don't really think it is about Arabs, do you?

Just in case you still don't get it, it is about full employment for the high-tech sector, for your friendly neighborhood "scientist." Will they stop before we are all under surveillance even in our own home, our own bedroom?

Note: I really don't want to believe this last bit, but I am stymied. There are easier, cheaper, more reliable ways to fix things. A government which creates the CO₂ lie and so many other frauds just cannot be trusted until it jetisons all of its prior bad baggage. Sorry. To go further is plain folly and compounds the frauds. Please tell me otherwise. Or have I just hit on another reason for so much fraud - - - ie., it takes another fraud to cover up and distract you from a previous one that then becomes inconsequential and just so much "old news." Do we have a "Wag the Fraud" mindset? How far can this concept go before it implodes? Do you recall the murders and mayhem that were going on in the U.S. before 9/11? If Osama bin Laden weren't out there, would we have to invent him? Nothing like an external enemy to take your mind off the internal dysfunctions, eh? Remember my warning that "they" would want complete control of you before the truth of what "they" were doing to us with local CO₂ became common knowledge? Seems to be coming true. Like I said, your ass is grass - - - unless you buy a new lawnmower and go after them first. Does Winchester make lawnmowers?

Eddy, Sr. would have enjoyed tearing into them. To Eddy, Sr., then, and to everyone with heart and guts and no angles!

Another note: Later, on the very day, Monday, July 22, 2002, that I impuned the motives of my government above and was feeling guilty for doing so, I was at a place where I could watch the cable news shows on TV. There was the President that I voted for claiming that we needed to get technology more involved in "The War On Terrorism." I hate it when I am right on these things. My President is wrong. It's the hearts and minds, stupid! It is definitely not technology that would control the hearts and minds. More recently, I have driven through Lynnwood and Federal Way in Washington State and have been dismayed by the number of cameras I see. What the hell is going on?

Copyright © 2002, Donald L. Beeman. All rights reserved.

Other Essays On Fraud
Other Essays
Table of Contents (up, more)
HOME (up, most)