Some of her honors include membership in the National Academy of Sciences, 20 honorary doctoral degrees, a MacArthur Genius grant, and the Blue Planet Prize. She served as the president of Ecological Society of America, the American Association for Advancement of Science, and the International Council for Science. Jane was a professor at Harvard and at Oregon State University, and then served as Undersecretary of Commerce and Administrator of NOAA in the Obama Administration, healthy on days of the Obama Administration. I heard an interview from Toni Morrison recently who said that when there was a book that wasn't out there for her to read, she had to write it. And I think that Jane has that same sort of feeling when there's a gap somewhere, there's a need for some sort of an organization, Jane just goes out and creates it. She was the founder of Compass, of the Leopold Leadership Program, of Climate Central, and others. These are all unique organizations that are working to make a real change and using science in the service of society as she laid out in that social contract for science. She's been an inspiration to me throughout my career, and I know that if she's not already an inspiration to you, she will be within the next hour, so please join me in welcoming the honorable Dr. Jane Lubchenko. And thank you so very much. I am so proud to claim you as my academic daughter, and that's not just because of all the nice things you said. One of the things that Bruce and I are really proud of are our academic kids, and that doesn't mean just going on to be professors in universities. It means doing important things wherever that work takes you and doing it in a way that can find a good life work balance, and I just think you've done a magnificent job. And truth be told, I think one of the reasons we are really interested in accepting you as a student was because, as I recall, you were an English major. And we're always looking for scientists who actually can write and speak and do other things above and beyond and do really good science. It is a great pleasure to be here at the Natural Capital Symposium. This is such an amazing group of people from all around the world that are engaged in incredibly important work, and I'm very honored to be asked to give one of the keynote addresses and really pleased to have an opportunity to spend a little time sharing some thoughts with you this evening. When I talked to Ann and to Mary about ideas for what I might focus on, one thing that they asked me to do was to really focus on science as ways that I have seen through my career, ways that science is really essential to governments and to civil society. And so what I'd like to do tonight is sort of in honor and celebration of what Nat Cap is. And in thanks to Ann and Mary and Gretchen and the amazing team of Nat Capers, what I really wanna do is focus on science in the context of this major, major global challenges that we have underway. Make no mistake, the challenges are incredibly daunting. The global social and environmental challenges that we have are so overwhelming, it's easy to give up. And as Gretchen noted last night, we're really facing intense and increasing planetary destruction and human suffering. And that pretty much encapsulates it. However, we are all here, you and me, we're all here together because we feel it's really important for us to tackle those challenges. And we believe that we actually can make some headway and make a difference. I'm here because I really wanna focus on the essential role that science has to play in this science societal challenge. What I'm gonna share with you tonight really has a few key messages. So I just wanna start with the bottom line for you. Number one is that civil society and governments need science. I say this as someone who has been on both sides or all sides of that. And I'll describe what I mean by that more specifically. Secondly, that we have strong evidence that science can actually help drive change. Three, the people who are in this room are in positions to really make a difference in terms of strengthening and empowering the science society connection that I think needs to be strengthened and empowered. And there is no better time than now to actually move on with doing that.  It's time to up the ante here. It's really time to get more engaged. We have new challenges on the horizon and now are some great opportunities. So I'm gonna go through sort of this sequence of thoughts. I'm gonna tell you where I'm coming from. I'm gonna give you a sense of how scientists are responding to some of the new and growing challenges. But I'm gonna give you some examples from the ocean to sprinkle a little wet and salty stuff around the room and then sort of tie that together with some lessons learned and end with an element of hope. So let's dive in. I'm an academic. I've been an academic for most of my life. I'm a marine ecologist. I've had an opportunity to work around the world and I have seen firsthand much of the degradation and devastation that either you know about or perhaps you've read about, whether it's loss of biodiversity in the ocean, dead zones, depleted fisheries, plastics. Whoa, what happened there? My Stanford wireless service just popped up on my screen and I can't find my cursor to do something about it. I need some A-B help please. You guys are seeing that slide but I'm not. Thank you. See if there's no cursor there. It disappeared. Oops, there it is. Okay, hopefully that won't happen again. Stanford wireless. Somebody's invading. Okay, so I bring very much an ecological perspective to these I think in terms of systems, interactions, not just within ecosystems but ecosystems and people. But then I had the opportunity to spend four years on President Obama's science team and work with people at very senior levels throughout the administration as well as lots of people that NOAA serves. NOAA focuses on weather, climate, oceans and coasts. It does science, it supports science and then it uses science to make weather forecasts, to manage fisheries, to describe the changes that are underway in our climate, to think about climate adaptation, et cetera. So I had an opportunity to connect with the users of that science. And I also had an opportunity to connect with a lot of governors and members of Congress and even do things like not just testify before Congress multiple times but actually do demonstration for Congress in the lower left hand corner here. This is for a congressional committee and I'm doing some lab demonstrations of ocean acidification. And I can tell you this is a very rare event for a congressional testimony and some of them didn't quite know what to make of it but they were full of questions. I also had an opportunity to spend two years as the first US science envoy for the ocean and to travel internationally as an official science diplomat to talk about ocean issues in developing countries around the world. And I'll tell you a little bit more about that in a few minutes. In addition to that though, I've had a lot of experience with scientific societies, with NGOs, with philanthropies, with the business community, with the finance communities. Either through partnerships or serving as boards or a leader in scientific professional societies, et cetera. So what I'm trying to do is integrate all these different perspectives into my thinking about science and society and how important it is for the way forward. As I was experiencing all of those, I had a number of experiences that have helped me think differently about some of the challenges of connecting science to government, of connecting the science to civil society. And one of those is often the preconceived ideas that people have about the individuals that they're interacting with. The story that I'm gonna tell is an example of that. Vice President Biden shown here, swearing me in, about a year after this happened, we were dealing with the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. And Noah was right in the middle of a lot of the issues having to do with the oil spill. The vice president asked the president, I'm sorry, the president asked the vice president to go to the Gulf of Mexico and talk to fishermen and describe to them what the federal government was doing, what we knew about the oil spill in fisheries. And the vice president said, I'm happy to go to the Gulf and talk to fishermen. I need somebody who knows what the government is doing, knows about oil and fisheries and can help explain it to me and set me right or set me, yeah, set me right if I say something wrong. So I flew with the vice president on Air Force Two down to the Gulf of Mexico and was briefing him on the plane about fisheries, about oil, how oil affects different types of seafood differently, affects fish differently from shrimp and crabs, differently from oysters, for example. And I was explaining all of this to him and then telling him what the government was doing to close fisheries so that we didn't have any contaminated seafood being consumed by people, et cetera. And partway through this, he stopped me and he said, I thought you were a scientist. And I thought, oh my gosh, what did I say, what did I do? And he said to me, I just understood everything you said. So here is a very, very distinguished and smart politician who has been briefed thousands of times by scientists and yet he thought he was not gonna be able to understand what I was saying. So it just illustrates one of the challenges of connecting science to society is making sure that we are being effective and bilingual as scientists and not just talking in nerdy, jargony terms but speaking in lay language that people can understand. I also had a somewhat similar experience with a member of Congress. We, NOAA, builds weather forecasts with NASA and then flies them and those, I'm sorry, we build weather satellites and then fly those weather satellites and those weather satellites provide over 90% of the data that go into your weather forecast. And we had a problem with the program that we were using or with the program that was building the next generation of weather satellites. Fixed that and then I had to go report to Congress how we had fixed it and tell them how important it was for them to fund the next generation of weather satellites so that we would continue to have better and better weather forecasts, more timely, more accurate, et cetera. And this one member of Congress said to me, doctor, I don't need your weather satellites. I've got the weather channel. And I thought, okay, that means I maybe better take a couple steps back and explain to him that the weather channel and AccuWeather and all the other private weather providers get their information from NOAA and 95% of that comes from the satellites. So as we're talking about science and society, civil society, governments, we need to make sure that the kinds of communications that we're not talking past one another, that we actually can connect in really meaningful ways. And that's not an easy thing to do. These experiences are likely mirrored by many that each of you have had in your interactions as you're doing partnerships and outreach. They're not unusual. I've been concerned for some time that much of what the scientific community has been doing has not been as connected to the real world as needs to be the case. And Ann mentioned this earlier, but in 1998, the address that I had given earlier as the presidential address to AAAS, I published with this title, focusing on the need for academics to get out of the ivory tower and to engage more with society and share what they were learning through research, not just with one another through scientific publications, but indeed directly with the public, directly with policymakers, directly with the business community. Over the last two and a half decades, the scientific community has been doing more and more of that and I was not the only one calling for it. The scientific community has, I think, made a couple of significant pivots, changes in how it's behaving from just doing science to also sharing it more broadly and more recently from not just communication, but to actual engagement and partnerships and collaborations. And I see these as very, very positive steps and they are mirrored by what a lot of you are doing. It's also going from doing just basic science to also doing use-inspired science and from simply characterizing problems, identifying them to actually co-crafting, co-divising solutions. And I think we've seen and need to feel proud that in fact there have been evolutions in the academic community in part in response to what society has needed. So I think we can feel good about that. What the scientific community does and how it does it has already changed significantly. And I think this is encouraging, it's positive, it gives us hope that in fact we can go the next step and have the next iteration that's needed. So I've talked a little bit about my perspectives and in general, in very general terms, the responses of scientists to these growing needs of society. Let me make that a little more concrete by focusing on some ocean examples of how scientists are engaging, how there's use-inspired science that is being done and brought to the table, how communities are working together to craft new solutions. And I would suggest to you that in fact there is a plethora of really amazing stuff that is bubbling up from all over the world. You don't hear much about the good stuff because indeed there is a lot of bad stuff but among all the doom and gloom there actually is a lot of hope. It's not at the scale we need but there are good things that are happening that we can learn from and we can figure out how to accelerate and scale it up. So it's happening because of new science and because scientists are engaging. And I'm going to give you three examples. One, reform of fisheries. Two, tackling, dealing with illegal fishing and the type of marine protected areas that are strongly to fully protected that we call marine reserves. So let's dive in. The grand challenge with the oceans to sort of take a broad view here is the following. Can we use the ocean without using it up? Can we use it in ways that are equitable without using it up? That's a subset of the planetary challenge obviously but I think it's useful to frame it in those terms. Marine ecosystems provide a wealth of ecosystem services of benefits to nature. They provide a lot of things that people are aware of and they provide a lot of things that people are less aware of. Oceans provide half of the oxygen that you breathe. So they're pretty important. Oceans absorb over 90% of the energy and excess heat that is trapped by greenhouse gases. And oceans absorb over 40% of the carbon dioxide that we emit. So in addition to the obvious things that people look to the oceans for, some of which are listed on this slide, there are a lot of hidden things that the ocean does for each of us that we need to be aware of and take into account. So the ocean provides a wealth of benefits. However, overfishing, habitat loss, climate change, pollution, ocean acidification are all individually and collectively disrupting ocean ecosystems and threatening the provision of the benefits that we want and need. All of these are compromised in part because as we lose biodiversity, as we change biogeochemical cycles, as we lose habitats, we're modifying the systems that are providing those benefits. A lot of people have said, oh my gosh, it is just too much, is it hopeless? How in the world are we gonna fix all of those things? And in fact, there's no doubt about it. It is really daunting. The challenges are immense. And my message to you today though is despite the immensity of the challenge, there is encouraging progress that's underway. And it's partly because of this engagement. Scientists are working together with industry, they're working with communities, they're working to propose solutions, not just identify problems. And they're doing in ways that are very interdisciplinary and with partnerships to find solutions, to use new technologies and bring them to the fore. So let me make that more concrete and focus on these three problems that I told you we were gonna talk about. Overfishing, so I've got sort of problem and then solution. So overfishing is a major problem and fishery reform is the solution that is emerging. Fisheries as you know are incredibly important. A lot of people, when they see or hear the term food security, they think grain, livestock, you should also think seafood. Both wild capture and aquaculture are incredibly important, not only for people today, but people in the future. And indeed, a lot of research is showing that it's a lot lighter impact on the planet to get food from the sea, whether it's wild capture or aquaculture, than almost anything on land. So the future is gonna lie in the sea. We have not done a very good job historically of managing fisheries. We've seen serial depletion of one stock after another after another, and there's always been another new place to fish. As we ran out one place, we moved on. Well, there are no more places, there are no more new places to fish. We fish everywhere. It used to be the case that much of the ocean was a de facto no take area because it was too far away, too deep, too remote, too inaccessible. We've changed that. Technology has been amazing. We can fish everywhere. And this picture of the fraction of the stocks that the food and agricultural organization characterizes in different categories has changed dramatically over the last half century. It used to be that most in the 50s, almost all of the stocks were developing. None were over exploited, none were collapsed. Fast forward to today, we have some very significant overfishing, especially if you consider not just the industrial scale fisheries, but a lot of the small scale fisheries that are so critical for the livelihoods and for the health and well-being of many people in coastal countries in developing nations. What fishermen around the world are finding is that they have to fish harder and harder for fewer and fewer returns. This is not hopeless, and it doesn't mean fishing harder and harder is the answer. There's new science that has been analyzing different ways that people use to manage fisheries which has given us new insights. And in 2008, a paper was published by Chris Costello, Steve Gaines, and John Linem at UC Santa Barbara, and they analyzed over 11,000 fisheries globally and asked the simple question, does the way a fishery is managed matter in terms of whether it is sustainable or not? The blue line on this figure is the fraction of fisheries that use a fishery management tool that I will call secure fishing rights. So these are various, lots of different types of rights-based approaches to fisheries. This particular one in this analysis is one that is called an ITQ, Individual Transferable Quota. But just think about this as a secure fishing rights approach. And as you can see, those types of fisheries didn't really start to become very abundant until the mid-80s, and then they have become much more abundant in terms of the number of fisheries globally. The red line are the fraction of fisheries that never did have and still don't have any kind of a secure access approach. And those have been collapsing at an increasing rate. The fraction that collapsed has just plummeted. In contrast, those fisheries that were initially managed traditionally, but then switched over to a secure access, fishing access approach, is in the purple. And as you can see, it had the same initial trajectory as the other red line, but then has bounced around a bunch. For sure, there's a lot of variation. But on whole, on balance, secure fishing rights fisheries are less likely to collapse. So that was a major new finding that got a lot of attention. And a lot of government officials, a lot of managers said, whoa, maybe we need to think more about different approaches to fishery management. Maybe we need to think about fishing smarter, not harder, and tools like secure fishing rights, change incentives for fishermen. It allows fishermen to be good stewards of the resource, to have a stake in the future and be part of the decision-making process. And that's what I mean when I say fishing smarter, not harder. So flipping from traditionally management approaches to more new approaches that reward stewardship instead of punishing stewardship has been key. We, at NOAA, had, so the United States is a significant fishing nation, both in terms of what it catches and what it imports. And in 2006, there were some major revisions to the law that manages fisheries in the US. And those revisions had two key features and these features have totally transformed fisheries in the US. This is a good news story. One feature was no more aspirational, yeah, we're gonna try to end overfishing. You must end overfishing. There was a mandate and it had to be done by a certain date and if it wasn't, there were penalties and if you overfished one year, you had to underfish the next year. And so collectively, there was a new accountability, new timetables with teeth, an ecosystem focus, and very importantly, the quotas for each fishery management plan had to be, or the quotas had to be set only on the scientific information about what could be fish sustainably. It could not be tweaked by economic or social pleas for more quota because we needed it. It was only based on the fishery. Moreover, the quotas had to be set in a way that not only ended overfishing, but rebuilt the stock. And so that inevitably leads to some initial pain. Ending overfishing means you fish less. And so the fishermen that were involved in this and helped craft these fishery management plans knew that there was going to be a period of time of really belt tightening, but with the hope that it would get better. The second key feature was the ability for any of these fishery management plans to utilize these secure access approaches to fishery management instead of traditional ones. They didn't have to, they could if it was appropriate to the fishery. And this law was passed by Congress in part because the lawmakers who crafted it knew it was going to be painful, but they deferred the pain for quite a few years down the road and that pain came due during the time I was at NOAA. So I had to oversee some of the tough stuff of implementing this new law that required ending of overfishing, rebuilding of stocks. And so it was, I can tell you how extremely difficult it was to do this. However, it has completely transformed US fisheries after decades and decades of more and more overfishing. I'm going to compare two years for you, the year 2000 and the year 2016. The number of overfished stocks in the US was 92 in the year 2000. That was slashed to 38. So that's an amazing change of ending overfishing. It's not completely ended, but we are absolutely on the right course and that is partly due to those two key provisions. Even more impressive is the fact that a number of fisheries that had been previously significantly depleted and had to be closed because they were so low, they have not only been rebuilt, but now they can again be fished. And so that's what we call a rebuilt stock. It is completely recovered. And we went from zero in the year 2000 to 43 in the year 2016. That is an amazing turnaround. And it happened much faster than all the fishery models suggested might be the case. And it happened in part because the fishermen had new incentives in these secure fishing, secure rights programs. They had new incentives to work together instead of competing. They work together, they trade information about where the fishing is best. They work together in ways that have been truly transformative. So initially there was pain, but in the last few years there have been significant increases in catch, in value, and in jobs. And now about two thirds of the fish by volume that are caught in the U.S. are under some kind of secure fishing rights program. So this is pretty impressive transformation. And it says it is possible, it's not easy, but it is possible to end over fishing and recover fisheries. I cannot give enough credit to the fishermen that led this reform. The champions that really said we can't, we don't have a future unless we fix this, we have to be part of the solution, we want to be part of the solution. And we had an opportunity to recognize a number of the leaders in this at the White House at a special event, celebrating champions of change for sustainable seafood. And these three guys whom I've worked with closely and know well are really the key. The EU has also had very significant problems with over fishing and looked at what we were doing and based in part on that and in part based on other experiences they had past reformed their common fishery policy in 2013 and are now in the process of going through the tough work of implementing that policy. So the jury is still out on how successful that's going to be across your fingers. It's really important that they have as good an outcome as we did. So the point here is that scientists have been working with politicians, with NGOs and fishermen, and that those interactions in the right circumstances with the right policies and good science and good scientists have really been transformative. This is not a story just about developed countries. This is also happening in many developing countries. And in Belize, for example, in their shallow water reef fisheries, there has been significant overfishing, significant problems, really, really tough for fishermen and their families right on the edge. The local fishing communities partnered with governments and NGOs to implement a pilot project that was a different type of secure access program. It wasn't an ITQ program, it was called a TERF. And illegal fishing decreased by 60%. The reporting rates for catches increased. And fishermen were empowered and have been so pleased with this program that the country said, okay, we don't need any more pilots. The initial thing was let's do a bunch of pilots. They said, let's just adopt it for the whole country. So that happened in 2016. There are now a number of right space programs around the world, around 200 of these fisheries worldwide representing about 50 species. You can see the size of the bubbles represents the number of species in different countries. So you can see that it's developed as well as developing countries. This is not a panacea. Just adopting a different type of fishery management won't fix everything. Just having good science at the table will not fix everything. These are very, very complex problems. The fishery, it has to be, each program has to be designed and appropriate for each fishery. And there's a lot of nuance in this. However, it can be a very powerful tool if it's appropriate and if it's well used. Some of the same researchers, Chris Castello, Steve Gaines and their team of people at Santa Barbara and the team at Environmental Defense Fund have worked together to say, okay, we've got some experience with a number of fisheries. We know that on balance, the number of fisheries in the world is going, I mean, so I'm sorry. So this access is the percentage of healthy stocks and it is on the decline. This is where we are now. So it's going down. With business as usual, the future does not look very good. If, in fact, we could just wave a magic wand and have good fishery management in all programs, they went through the exercise of saying, how long would it take fishery by fishery to recover the fisheries that were depleted? How much would it cost and what would be the benefit? And they discovered, after doing lots and lots of modeling of individual fisheries all around the world, that on balance, most fisheries could be recovered after about 10 years, which is pretty darn quick. And yes, it costs something to do that, but the benefit outweighs the cost 10 to one. And if we could do that, if we could switch over, we could flip from that trajectory to this trajectory in terms of fisheries that were well managed. So when in place, secure fishing rights would have a huge benefit. And in fact, what they suggest from their modeling is that we could more than double the fish populations in the ocean while expanding by almost 30% the availability of wild fish as a food for a hungry planet and tripling the impact of fishing on the global economy. So there is a huge triple bottom line win according to their models of getting fisheries fixed. So the messages here are, it's not hopeless. We do, can reform, it's not easy. The upside of doing so is huge and it's well worth figuring out how to do it. This information has gotten the attention, these analyses have gotten the attention of a lot of government officials in a number of countries. When I was serving as the science envoy for the ocean dealing with high level officials in China, they were keenly interested in fisheries and in aquaculture because food security is a really important issue. And looking at that information that I just shared with you and that I had shared with them, we decided to embark on a joint effort of government and academics from both China and the US working together to think about new ways to manage fisheries, to do aquaculture, to do marine spatial planning in coastal areas. So that's one thing that's just being launched and I hope will be successful. It's a nice compliment to a lot of the net cap work that's underway here. Also Indonesia, another major fishing nation became really intrigued by these results and both China and Indonesia were two of the countries that stand, that have the biggest upside in terms of the biggest potential for recovering depleted fisheries and having more seafood to eat, more fish in the water to be parts of ocean ecosystems and economic benefit. And so the minister of fisheries and maritime affairs in Indonesia, Minister Susie, has been keenly interested in these and is now, has her team, the fishery managers, working with these scientists to try to refine their fishery models and think about fishery reforms. So the message with fisheries is that it's not easy but it's possible and scientists engaging and good new science is actually creating new opportunities to find solutions. The second problem I wanna focus on more briefly is illegal fishing and this is sort of the flip side. We've been talking about fishing that's legal and now we're gonna switch to illegal fishing which is a really bad problem and you see on the left here what happens quite frequently, all too frequently in today's ocean which is a fishing vessel, the one on the right is offloading its catch, its illegal catches are being offloaded to a refrigerated vessel, a reefer, that is also supplying the fishing vessel with its supplies and fuel so that it can stay out there and not have to come into port and be caught with an illegal catch. So these illegal boats can stay out there for long, long months at a time, often with slave labor, not always but often and so illegal fishing is a real significant problem. It's illegal, it's also unregulated and unreported is sort of lumped together as IUU and it is a problem that is on the order of up to as much as $23 billion a year so it's very, very significant loss to the legal fishing communities. There's been new political, new policies and new political will to tackle illegal fishing and new technology has been brought to bear. The Interpol has created a new international fishery crime unit. There's now a new platform for foreign ministers and heads of state to come together and talk about illegal fishing and other ocean issues, a platform called the Our Ocean Conference that John Kerry started when he was Secretary of State. And when I was at NOAA, we negotiated a new agreement through the Food and Agricultural Organization called the Port State Measures Agreement which says any countries that have signed this agreement will agree to not let illegal fishing vessels come into their ports. If they do, they can be seized, the ship, the crew can be seized, thrown in jail, the owners can be fined, the catch can be seized. And so there is now new political will to tackle what has been such an impossible problem that people just kind of weren't willing to think about it and that has changed very dramatically. Even more so because we have some new technology and new approaches to bring to the problem. Science, big data, technology, machine learning are all combining to do things like this global fishing watch which is a new program that was originally a partnership between Oceania SkyTruth and Google and help Mr. IT guy. My screen just went blank again. I don't know what Stanford's doing here but I've got this wireless visitor service message again. Oh, okay, fixed it, sorry. Got it. I don't know how to turn that off, sorry. So this is a really amazing program that's now spun off on its own and it takes advantage of the fact that all vessels of a certain size have to have transponders on them that tell other vessels where they are so they don't crash in the middle of the fog or the night. Each one of the points on these images is a fishing vessel and the machine learning comes in when you can track these vessels and know who's doing what, when, and where and figure out from their tracks whether they're fishing or not and whether they're fishing illegally or not. And I'm going to show you an animation so you can see what this actually looks like but I have to, so this is in the Pacific Ocean. I'm just going to describe it so you guys can look at both sides. On the far right, there's a circle, sort of a circle, some kind of polygon there. Circle by red, surrounded by red. That is part of the US exclusive economic zone around one of the Pacific remote islands. The same is true of the square that's up in the top. Right's dead in the middle of the screen. You can see a faint red line that is also a polygon that is around the Pacific, the Phoenix Island protected area which is part of the nation of Kiribati.  And you can see when the area that was in this protected area was declared protected, then all the fishing vessels are moving away from the area and pretty much leaving it intact. So you can see which vessels are in there and they're not supposed to. And you can actually click on any one of those points and you can get the VIN, the identification number for the vessel and figure out who owns it, what it's doing. So there are new tools that are being brought to bear on both catching illegal fishing but also catching them in places where they're not supposed to be like protected areas. We've also seen benefits of combining these tools, fishery reform and addressing IUU. This is a paper that came out just two days ago in Nature Ecology and Evolution and it shows both the changes in harvest and the changes in profit through time for comparing the current situation which is in purple. So an open access fishery in Indonesia is going to be on the decline in a relatively quick period of time if nothing is done to reform fisheries or to tackle illegal fishing. The orangey, yellowy, sort of orangey peach color, maybe that's a better description, is if you tackle, let's do the teal next, the teal is if you have an illegal fishing policy, IUU policy and open access, you get a little bit more benefit but the best benefit comes if you tackle both, if you reform the fisheries and if you have a policy for IUU fishing which is what Indonesia does. And so this is a modeling exercise that really describes how these tools are complimentary and you need both of them. One final thing on this front and that is that there are more and more business leaders in the seafood companies that are paying attention to these issues and the University of Stockholm through the Stockholm Rosalind Center has formed a new really innovative partnership with the CEOs of the 10 biggest seafood companies in the world, both fishing and aquaculture. And these companies, these CEOs have formed something called Seafood Business for Ocean Stewardship and have publicly committed to being part of the solution, not part of the problem and they are beginning to work together to figure out how they are going to be tackling illegal fishing, traceability, slave labor, all of the issues that are sort of surrounding these. Still, jury is out on this as to how successful it will be but it's a really exciting new development. So on the IUU front, there's a lot of new stuff that's happening and a problem that used to be thought of as being impossible is actually being tackled. Boats are being confiscated, catches are being confiscated. It's harder and harder to get away with doing bad stuff. Switching to the third and final example, loss of safe havens. I mentioned from the outset that it used to be the case that most of the ocean was a de facto protected area. Now very little of it is and that's a problem in terms of protecting biodiversity, protecting healthy oceans. We absolutely need fishery reform but we also need some safe havens and those safe havens are what we call marine reserves which are fully protected from any extractive activities fishing, mining, drilling, et cetera. There is one big high seas common that represents almost 60% of the surface area of the ocean. The rest of it, 42% is in the territorial waters of individual countries and most of the action on the marine reserve front is in the country's exclusive economic zones and what we have seen through time is after decades and decades of NGOs saying we need protected areas, we need protected areas and not much happening, all of a sudden in the last decade there has been a very sharp increase in the area in marine protected areas more broadly and that's the histograms on the upper, the blue is all MPAs and the green are those that are strongly or fully protected. Those are the marine reserves and those are the ones that have the most benefit. So that increase is due in part to new science being synthesized, coalesced, developed and communicated to people in more user friendly terms such as this series of booklets on marine reserves of the world. And these are just a few of the results but we know from a lot of science that has been done that marine reserves protect biodiversity, they're actually great at that. There is an abundance of information that when you stop fishing in an area, mining and drilling, things get big, they get abundant and that abundance spills over to adjacent areas outside. We know that one of the most important things that happens in a protected area is that individuals can get really big whether it's a fish or a crab or whatever and big means lots more young. This shows a European sea bass and you see on the upper left, there's one that's 40 centimeters and that 40 centimeter fish makes on average 230,000 young. If you let that 40 centimeter fish grow to 80 centimeters on the far right, that fish produces 3.3 million young. So a little bit bigger size means lots more young and that's the future of those populations. So that is the future to recover depleted fisheries, to recover areas inside a reserve and that's one of the most important features of a marine reserve is letting things get big. Those young can be transported outside, we know that happens and have data to show it and if you have a very large protected area, you can protect multiple habitats and lots of fish and other invertebrates spend time in different habitats during their life history. We also know, also critically important, that protected areas can restore the ecological interactions within a reserve. By restoring the top predators, they can regain control over the trophic level down from them and there are cascading trophic interactions that are critically important so having more balanced ecosystems and more resilient ones. We also know that marine reserves can buffer against mismanagement mistakes and uncertainty and we're finding increasingly that protected areas are less likely to change if there is an environmental change and they are faster to recover if there is an adverse event like a bleaching event and so people are increasingly calling marine reserves climate reserves, thinking of this not just as a tool for conservation but a climate adaptation tool that should be added to the toolbox. The countries of the world have committed to protecting 10% of the global ocean by 2020 but that's in any kind of marine protected area. We are far from that but we are making progress. So the good news is that a number of countries have seized on the opportunity from 2015 to 2017. Quite a few countries made big announcements mostly at the our ocean conference about setting aside significant fractions of their territorial waters. This has often involved extensive consultation between a government and indigenous people such as in Easter Island, the Rapa Nui. People really led and participated actively and voted in favor of creating a new Rahui around their area. And a very innovative new development in seychelles brokered by the nature conservancy was the first in the ocean debt for nature swap where in exchange for relieving foreign debt the country of seychelles would agree to set aside 30% of its EEZ exclusive economic zone as protected and create a climate adaptation fund to do climate adaptation both in the ocean and on land and do marine spatial planning for the whole EEZ. They're now also issuing blue bonds. And I think this is a really nice example of a very innovative approach to combine financing with conservation. When President Obama came into office only 5% of the US exclusive economic zone was protected by the time he left that had been increased over fourfold to 23%. And he did that using his executive powers under the Antiquities Act to create marine national monuments. Those may be at risk. We are working hard to keep these, but time will tell. And I mentioned again that this new tool global fishing watch can actually help patrol these areas not just deal with IUU fishing. And finally, most of the protected areas that exist are within countries waters. There is one very, very large one in the Antarctic in the Southern Ocean called the Ross Sea Marine Protected Area that was agreed upon by 25 governments who had to all agree to do this through one of the regional fishery management organizations. So in conclusion for the marine reserves part of this we've seen powerful science and partnerships, new political leadership and new social norms resulting in an order of magnitude increase in strongly protected areas globally. That's a far cry from the 30% that scientists say is probably needed. So we have a lot of work to do on that front but there's increasing momentum. Marine reserves may be especially important in providing greater resilience against climate change but there is still very active resilience on the part of the extractive user community and the public is pretty much unaware of this issue. So we've talked about examples from the ocean. I wanna pivot very quickly to lessons learned and hope. We've talked about three examples and I wanna emphasize across all three of these how important it is to think about the role of incentives in changing behavior, behavior of individuals, behavior of corporations, behavior of governments, either economic incentives or social incentives, changing social norms, focusing on personal values and across all of these examples there are I think is a powerful message that is emerging that focusing on incentives is a really powerful way to think about how do we affect the kinds of changes that are needed. The right incentives can convert a vicious cycle of unsustainable practices to a virtuous cycle of sustainable practices. So in short, I think there are a lot of reasons to be hopeful despite the overwhelming daunting nature of the challenges we've seen science-based policy reforms. It is possible to end overfishing and rebuild depleted stocks. There's increasing importance of the recognition to focus on incentives and get them right. There's a big upside to fixing fisheries. There's serious attention to ending IUU fishing and there are increases in marine reserves and there is increasing momentum to do that. So my bottom line to you is that solutions do exist. They're not at the scale that we need, they're not being taken up as fast as we need, especially in light of the magnitude of the challenge and some of the biggest threats are just lack of awareness that there is even a problem or that there are solutions. And so there's a lot of work to be done and a lot of opportunity. So I posed the question to you, can we use the ocean without using it up? I would say that if the message here is yes, we can. And it's my hope that we can recover the bounty and use it wisely. And so I turned to my bottom line at the top of my time. Civil society and governments need science. We have strong evidence that science can help drive change and that all of you are in positions in your various roles to be working together to make some of these changes happen. Now is the time to really up our game. Now is the time to really get engaged and to build on what we've learned, accelerate process. And that I think will give us hope for science and society both. Thank you very much. Well, let's start there. So we only have time for one question, perhaps, and then we have a reception. We can talk informally. Where you can talk informally with Jane. One question, make it a good one. No pressure. Over here. There's a mic right here. Hi, hello, my name is Andre and I work with the African Development Bank. And thank you very much for this very hopeful and positive message.  Not too long ago I came across in Europe of a civil servant working actually for a tax authority, higher education and all that. And he seemed to believe on flat earth. And aside from the initial shock that I had, what struck me most was that there's a complete erosion of trust in science, in institutions, and it's a complete disbelief that I find in a certain way is also what reflects our society currently. So my take is, and I fully support your point of communication and evolving science and putting science at the base. But at the same time, it seems that there's a complete lack of trust. And how can we overcome that lack of trust and how in your experience we find that we can regain some worthiness, some trustworthiness into our work? Thank you. So that's a great question. And I think it's one that a lot of us have been very cognizant of in this post-truth world, the populist movements that are going on around the country, around the world. And I think that part of the reason that we are having a lot of distrust is that some science in academia has not bothered to sort of to be transparent about what we do or how we do it. And there's been a lot of science done in the Ivory Tower that has not really engaged citizens, engaged policy makers. And I think one of the ways, so there are complex social factors that are underpinning a lot of what's going on. I don't wanna not recognize the complexity of these issues. And there are a lot of things that are driving this. However, I think that there is an opportunity by doing the kind of not just communication, but engagement with communities, with industry, with government officials and co-creating knowledge because then people are part of the process and they trust it, they believe in it. And there has been a lot of tension over the years between fishermen and fishery managers or scientists because the fishermen say, these guys don't know what they're talking about, they go out and sample an area and they don't even know where the fish are, they just sample all over the place. We know where the fish are, they're over here. If they wanna sample fish, go over there. And they don't understand a sampling protocol. And so there's been a complete sort of disconnect between some fishermen and some scientists. And in fact, many of the programs that have gotten over that have been fishermen working with scientists, co-designing, sampling, and then so there's increased sharing of information in both directions and then trusting the information that comes out the other end. So I think we need more of that. Engagement is not the answer to everything, but I think it would help a lot in some of the challenges that we have that are above and beyond what I had time to talk about. So thank you all very much. Appreciate it. Thank you.


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebrakes.com coming at you with jaspys big hit express multi-sport series five six-box random team break number 19 from jaspyscasebrakes.com big hit High risk high reward type of break Got a lot of lot of stuff in here Prim 4 4 4 4 actually crunched some numbers for us, and I think he was saying that 21 of the 53 Cell sheet hits are still left are still remaining. That's about 39.6 percent are still available somewhere in These cases we're already we're a little over halfway through this run this print run So still a lot of cell sheet hits to go and plenty of great stuff that aren't even on the cell sheets and hidden treasures big Thanks to all of these folks for getting into the action late on a Saturday night. I appreciate that and And let's grab the teams from this list right here now We forgot to add the brewers to this so if we pull a brewer in this break We'll do a re-randomizing of the names at the end with a new dice roll and then Name on top. We'll get it All right, so let's do the randomizer for names and teams right here Fine yet Logan pointing out he got a $500 valued car that wasn't even on the cell sheet So a lot of still a lot of great stuff in these cases folks Five and a four nine times for each list for names and teams and for the cases when we randomize case numbers one Two And ninth and final time after nine we got BJ down to Stephen K. All right five and four nine times for the teams one Eight and I said nine right five and a four. Yes five and a four eight and again ninth and final time There's nine right there. We've got Giants Raiders Bulls all the way down to Nationals Dolphins Clippers I'm not gonna read off all these names, but I will alphabetize by your first names in just a second here BJ there are your teams Matt Ryan Mark Aaron Todd Eastwood Taylor T. J. Rick BJ Lee's y'all Chen Matt Alex Vala Sakos Eric I'm not gonna try your last name Tyler Riza Tyler Rutledge Randy Derek Tyler Dario Kang BJ Matt Taylor Dario TJ Leonard Eric Daniel Sean and Stephen K. Let's sort this by First names right here Let's make the font bigger again. There you go Once more through the list and back And we're gonna go back to this screen really quick go to the hit list list where we keep tracking Keep tracking track of all the hit list folks for the promo details on the site jaspyscasewrakes.com and I think we've done 18 cases right. This is break number 19 So these are the cases that are remaining Let's put them into this list right here same dice roll nine and Ninth and final time and after nine times. It's gonna be case nine interesting Let me go grab that if you look at the top camera above my Mickey hat You can see case nine Right there. All right any trades Tyler is saying both of his spots For the Angels Texans spot if Eastwood is in the chat All right Eastwood says no, thanks. All right, let's roll TWC trade window closed Let's make this a little bit smaller so I can see Let's rip. Good luck everybody Matt Medlin's a sorcerer again Be sure to follow us on social media at jaspys breaks And we've got a graded card to lead things off and it's an autograph too. It's a 1010 Not a black label 1010, but still a 1010. It's wow Nolan Ryan retired numbers from 2015 sport Kings on card autograph Tens all around centering edges surface all attend the corners are the nine five and His autograph a 10 Wow, that is awesome There you go Rangers with that one Rangers colors That'll be for Sean Attebury with the Rangers Titans Yankees combo. That's really nice All right next one. Be sure to follow us Carl Malone from opulence Lakers edition of Carl Malone nice Eight out of 49 We do have opulence available in the store. We'll be able to break that tomorrow jaspys case breaks calm Opulence of the kind of hits that end up in a big hit express product that goes to the Lakers Ryan with the Marlins Panthers Lakers combo Ryan Kasin All right next one graded card It's a mint nine and it's gonna be Vlad Guerrero Jr Nice autograph right there 63 out of 75 from 2019 tops gold label baseball nice rookie frame and Autograph for the bluebirds who's got the blue jays That's Taylor Dwyer with the blue jays Colts Hornets combo. No train whistle yet. It's at least one per case I didn't miss one right now. That's not number. That's not yet Should be at least one per case on average We've got Pascal Siakam that's wrong too. That's back in 2016 rookie Pascal Siakam PSA 10 His sock has rise significantly since 2016. That's for sure It's a hollow Pascal even better hollow Pascal Siakam as well PSA 10 Raptors That'll be for Derek V the Mariners Raptors Vikings combo two more to go another horizontal landscape mode landscape mode We got Hall of Famer Hall of Gold Thurman Thomas You got a little sliver of 14 karat gold right there Wow Buffalo and that's a one-of-one. There's the train whistle Buffalo That's some Buffalo gold Buffalo For those of you who know what that's all about If you don't then it's just some it's just some weirdo yelling Buffalo that goes to the bills Jags Padres combo Tried to trade couldn't trade mojo Buffalo Tyler Brenner all aboard the big hit express Buffalo all right and the last one ladies and gentlemen Good luck. It's another one that goes this way A dual autograph. Hopefully it's the same team. I think they're the same team. It is another one-of-one David Ortiz big poppy and no ma Nomar Garcia para dual on card autograph That is awesome from 2018 definitive tops definitive collection baseball Hot what do we got here? Who's got the red socks? That's Taylor Dwyer with the red socks Sacramento Kings Combo scary good hits Taylor all aboard the big hit express Great case another one in the books ladies and gentlemen I'm Joe for jazzy's case breaks calm. I'll see you next time for more. Bye. Bye


That's behind your back. Canadian forces are nearly 4,000 miles from their home base in Shiloh, Manitoba. The job of their American hosts? Try to make their visit as unpleasant as possible. At least for three days. Basically, what we're doing is we're being opposition forces for the Canadians, so that way they get the best training possible and then the scenarios that we're running. It was part of this year's Rim of the Pacific exercise, or RIMPAC 2012, being conducted in and around the Hawaiian Islands. It's a lot different than what we're used to. It's a lot more realistic, allowing troops to break through plateaus and get a better threshold on their soldier abilities. The training also exposed U.S. Marines to new tactics, techniques and procedures. For Marine Corps Forces Pacific, I'm Corporal Ben Eberle.


We know cured meat increases cancer risk, childhood leukemia, for example, yet higher intake of vegetables is associated with a reduced risk. How can nitrites be bad in meat, but good when they originate in our own mouth from all the nitrates we get from green leafy vegetables? Well, one possibility could be that nitrates are not good, and such a case has been made, blaming the rise of Alzheimer's diabetes, Parkinson's, and the kitchen sink. Not only the rise in fast food and processed meat, but also the use of nitrate-containing fertilizers on our crops. Now this was dismissed as an unsupportable conclusion, but by the vice president of the Fertilizer Institute. So how do we know it's just not allowed a bull? And speaking of manure, organic producers in fact bragged that their vegetables are significantly lower in nitrates. So nitrates in plants, is it just a matter of too much of a good thing? Are nitrates in foods harmful or healthy? Before our heads explode, let's go back to the basics. The facts of the case, the nitrosamines are the carcinogens, not the nitrites themselves. The nitrosamines are what cause the cancers. The only reason we're concerned about nitrites is that, under certain circumstances, they can turn into nitrosamines and other N-nitroso compounds. And the only reason we're worried about the nitrates is that they form nitrites, which again under certain circumstances can form nitrosamines. The nitrites themselves are fine, in fact amazing. That's what all the new beats and blood pressure evidence I showed points to. And the nitrates turn into nitrites, which turn into nitric oxide, which helps our arteries in athletic performance. So as long as nitrites turn into N-O, we're good. It's only when they turn into nitrosamines that they cause trouble. So the answer to the riddle, finally, lies in the circumstances in which nitrites form nitrosamines. And that circumstance is in the absence of plants. Phytonutrients like caféic acid found in all plants blocks nitrosamine formation for rulic acid, ascorbic acid, vitamin C, and other. So nitrates plus plant foods, no problem. But is there any vitamin C in meat? No. So you add nitrites to meat and nitrosamines preform in the meat before it even makes it into our mouths. It's not so much that we're eating the nitrites added to the meat, but eating the nitrosamines that form in the meat when they add nitrites to it. Nitrites, in the absence of plants, turn into carcinogenic nitrosamines.


The day was Thursday 24th of July, 2008. I woke up in my parents' home and announced to them that I would be getting out of their home. I packed my books and a few tattered clothes and traveled to another state in my country. I had with me less than $50, so it's safe to say that I had no money. Yet, I wanted to start a business because I was scared to death with the thought of getting a job and getting hooked on a job forever. That was over 11 years ago.  In today's video, I'm going to be sharing with you 10 lessons I've learned in my career as an entrepreneur. If you're new here, don't forget to subscribe so you won't miss other interesting videos like this. 1. Time will never be right to start a business 12 years ago, when I was preparing for my intrapreneurial journey, I wasn't alone.  Today, most of them are only intrapreneurs on the social media profiles. But why? Well, they waited and are still waiting for the right time. Millions of people in the world are like that, waiting for the right time to do what they want to do. Listen to this. My Bible tells me in Ecclesiastics 11 verse 4, those who wait for the perfect weather will never plant seeds. Those who look at every cloud will never harvest a crop. The day I started in the business world, everything was wrong. Nothing was right, except for the business books I owned and I have read. If you genuinely want to start a business and you're hoping for a perfect day, I'm sorry, you'll never begin because such a day will never come. 2. You don't need money to start a business Ok, so many people won't believe this and I won't struggle much to convince you. For those of you who are willing to listen, you don't need money to start a business. Or let me say, you don't need your own money to start a business. As I have told you, the day I started out as an intrapreneur, I had almost no money. The only thing I had was a determination to succeed at all costs, the knowledge I had gathered from hundreds of books and my willingness to fail as much as needed before succeeding. I tell you, if you have all these attributes, you already have 90% of what you need to build a business. 3. It's better to start when you're young Today I see many people saying, I'll start a business after I work for 5 years. The problem with such thinking is that your 5 years will become 10. And then you'll discover you have lost many of the blessings that come with being young. Here's the thing, entrepreneurship is difficult.  Take for example, you can say, I'll join the military when I'm 40. If you want to join the military, you better do when you're 20 or as early as you can because it's a difficult thing to do. I tell you, if I had not started my intrapreneurial journey the year I did, I probably would never have. This is not to discourage those who are old but to tell the truth about the nature of entrepreneurship. It's difficult and the earlier you start, the better you'll be able to cope with those difficulties. 4. There is no trusted formula for entrepreneurial success Okay, why did I say that entrepreneurship is difficult? Well, entrepreneurship is difficult because there's no trusted formula anyone can give you that can guarantee your success. Yes, there are millions of books out there and I've read hundreds of them. But even if you can read a million books about entrepreneurship, you won't still find a magical formula for success. Every success in the business world is arrived at through trial and error. No certainties, no guarantee. You simply have to believe that the dud will connect itself and run as hard as you can to make it work. 5. Nobody will believe in you I was the favorite to everyone in my family. Until that horrible day I announced to them that I wanted to leave school to start a business. You see, everyone knows that you're nine times more likely to fail than to succeed as an entrepreneur. Why would they believe you're capable of beating such odds? Unfortunately, many want to be entrepreneurs because other people don't believe in them enough to support them. Stop waiting for other people's approval. They want to prove of you anyway. 6. Friends matter While I was not fortunate to get any of my family members to believe in my dreams, I was lucky to have a few very helpful friends. You see, it's easier for your friends to believe in you and support you than for your family to do the same. I don't know why this is so, but that's been my observation. My friends, though they are few, are the source of inspiration and support to me. So, I would advise you to keep good friends. Make friends with people who are ambitious, positive and actors. Don't hang around people who make excuses and complain about everything. 7. Focus on learning how to sell When I started, I loved to read anything, just anything related to business. However, at some point, I discovered that 80% of everything called entrepreneurship is about selling. So, I started making 80% of my studies about selling and marketing. Forget everything anyone can tell you about inventing a new product, packaging or business management. Business is about selling. Everything else is a documentary. You must learn how to sell yourself, your business and your product. Again, business is all about selling. Everything else is a documentary. 8. You must become a learning machine I don't know any single successful entrepreneur who doesn't learn all the time. And the reason for that is because someone is always at the corner planning to send you away from the market. If you don't know what I know about the market, our customers and the product, that will kill your business in a matter of months. 9. One year of success makes 10 years of failure feel like 10 days I woke up one day in February 2016 expecting my day to be like the previous day. But that day was going to be different. That was the day I discovered the business idea that gave me my first big break in the business world. Yes, that happened 8 years after I have been in the business world. But I can tell you, those 8 long boring and terrible years look like 8 short days to me today. Because when you eventually succeed as an entrepreneur, your years of failure start looking like dreams.  This is my encouragement to everyone who wants to build a successful business. Don't be afraid of terrible failures. You just have to succeed once. And you'll think it's all a dream. Mark Cuban once said, You can fail as much as you need to. You only have to succeed once. 10. It is worth it, even if you die trying So, let me say this to those people who are afraid or start in a business because they could fail. Trying to build a business is worth it, even if you die trying. You see, building a business if you fail you can do it is by far one of the greatest things anyone can do with their lives. The reason for this is because business is the blood of humans. Don't mind those people who criticize entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. Everything in life has its strength in business. There's no money without business. There's no economy without business. There are no jobs without business. There are no great products without a business. There's nothing without a business so any man who dreams of building a business dreams of saving the world. What else would you have to die for? If not a worthy cause, like this. So, if you've tried to build a business and failed a few times, you should be proud of yourself. If you're planning to start a business and fear is keeping you from venturing out, you should look in the mirror and tell yourself the truth, which is building a successful business is a worthy cause and so it is worth it, even if you fail. I honestly hope this video helps someone. If you have not subscribed to our channel, don't forget to subscribe. We love you.


With Allah's name, the Merciful Benefactor, the Merciful Redeemer, I give open and sound testimony that there is none worthy of worship except Allah and Allah alone, and I give open and sound testimony that Prophet Muhammad is indeed the Messenger of Allah. I greet you all audience this evening with a greeting of peace. Assalamu alaikum. Tonight we're going to have an open and frank discussion about a very essential movement and a narrative that is taking place in America. In the backdrop of many incidents that are taking place globally and nationally, among people trying to find identity, trying to find relief, trying to find relationships, trying to be culturally competent, as well as those who are a major part of society today, and that is the faith community. The faith community has an extremely large and important role to play in any society and in all times. But sometimes that faith community can find itself divided against itself until someone has the courage to step outside of the ring, step outside of the box if you will, come out of the dark and into the light and open up a conversation and have a dialogue. Tonight we're going to talk about the forerunner who has started this dialogue and where that dialogue is today. We have with us some very experienced men, men of knowledge, men of faith, men who have traveled around the world, men who have interacted and intersected with societies and peoples from all around the world. We're going to talk about the interfaith movement here in America, what it has produced, what we hope it to produce, and where we're going from here. To my immediate right we have Imam Raqib Abdul-Jabbar, and to his right we have Imam Antar Jannah, and to his right we have Imam Abu Qadir El-Amin. My brothers, I greet you in the greedy of peace. As-salamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa rahmatullah. When we talk about the interfaith movement, we know that in our book, the Qur'an, and we're all Muslim, God lets us know that we are to respect his books and to respect his people, and that there is a kinship among the people, Christians, Muslims, and Jews, and all people of goodwill and faith. But the Abrahamic faith community has a specific and a unique bond within itself. And we know that for many years if we kind of wind the clock back a few years, go back, back, back into time just a little bit, then we'll race forward. There was a time when the largest identifiable Muslim community in America was a community that spoke rather harshly, I would say at times, about its brethren and cousins in their faith community. And there was a reason for that, there was a context for the narrative. But God and his wisdom, grace and mercy, saw fit to have that community, which was then the nation of Islam, transition from its developmental stages into, I would say, an expedited entry into a global thinking and a reconciliation of thought to become an active community and a leading community in reconciling not only its own thought, but reconciling its relationship with others, the people of the book. And the forerunner and leader of that movement was the late Imam Wadath Houdin Muhammad. May Allah be pleased with him. I would like to start with you, Imam Abu Qadir Al-Amin. If you would give us the listening audience or the viewing audience, some insight, try to keep it, you know, a little briefer than my introduction into your experience with that movement and how you see the interfaith movement today. Yes. Okay, well, to give a little background, I'm going to try to be as brief as I possibly can and be as thorough as I can. At about 14 years of age, my older brother was involved with the nation of Islam and began to bring home literature, newspapers, books, things of that nature. And many of my peers became members of the nation of Islam. So at about 14 years old, I began to be influenced by the language of the nation of Islam and the narrative of the nation of Islam as it existed at that time. Then at about 17 years old, I began to claim Islam. And at 19 years old, I made a serious commitment to follow Islam. At 20 years old, I began to practice Islam. So coming out of the nation of Islam, we were characterized as a baby nation.  But that same baby that used to cry a lot and holler about the discomforts and holler when it was hungry and holler when it was in pain has evolved. And now is, I would say, a young adult, no longer a teenager. There's been some years that have passed. We've evolved. We've grown in our intellect and our understanding of our faith. And we are no longer constrained by the structures of what was that baby nation. And we have been involved with interfaith at the direction of Imam W.D. Mohamed since he stepped into leadership in 1975. And so some of us came from households and families that didn't necessarily accept Islam. So we have sensitivities for Christians. And we understand the life of Christians. Many of us came from that background. So for us, interfaith was natural. We were already involved in interfaith activity if not necessarily dialogue with our family members. But now it's more pronounced, it's more deliberate. And we have established purposely relationships with Christians and Jews in our locales to further our understanding and look for opportunities for cooperation. And not just dialogue, but working together on common concerns. Imam Anta Jannah, I remember at a point in our development, when there was a movement, and that movement was the movement to remove all racial images that attempt to portray the divine. And I remember that you were very active and enthusiastic in that movement. That movement seemed to have been, from my perspective, the movement that I would say heralded in many good works. As we targeted the Vatican, with Imam Wurthi Muhammad was introduced to the Vatican. And great works came out of that. And great works came out of the results, out of the work that you were leading in that particular movement at the time. How do you see the development of the interfaith narrative, the development of the interfaith work as Imam Alameen has addressed? And where do you see that work giving fruit today? That's a good question. Just to talk about Craig, Imam Muhammad brought in this committee in 1978, 79. And when he moved to Oakland and became the resident Imam here, he made me the, I was the resident Imam. Craig Chairman of Oakland. And he made me the national Craig Chairman. And so, and he moved here. And when he moved here, we were very active. We would visit the pastors and give them 90 days. We were talking about idol worship and the removal of statues and pictures from the churches. And so I thought, I was called like the calling card of the prophets. Imam Muhammad was letting them know, even though he was a Muslim, he was concerned with the Christian church. And so we would give them an opportunity to take them down. If they didn't in 90 days, we would pick at the churches. So we were picking churches, nonviolent protests. We were picking churches all over the Bay Area, Richmond, East Palo Alto, San Francisco, Oakland. And just as a short story, the preacher's union was very upset about that. It was kind of bad for business. And so they delegated one of their representatives, Reverend Thrower, to meet with Imam Muhammad. And so we went to Imam, Reverend Thrower's church. And he said he felt like a pot of spilt meat with Jesus. And he complimented Imam. He gave a nice presentation. And then Imam gave a presentation. And the Imam told him that we would no longer pick at the churches anymore, because he just wanted to put something on their mind just to educate them. And I think that was monumental, because we sent the word out all around the country to let them know what had happened in Oakland, and then everybody stopped. And Imam was just trying to let the Christian, that was interfaith to me at his highest level. He was letting the Christian to immediately know that Exodus 20 verses 115 said there should be no graven images in religion. And he was just there to educate them, because they were there. They were there. And he was suggesting that they take it down. And to see the interaction between Imam and Reverend Thrower that day, to me, that was the first opportunity I had to see a prominent pastor representing the preacher duty. And Imam Martha D. Muhammad, a national leader, have dialogue about this element that was in Christianity that needed to be removed. And Imam was in the forefront, like you say, he was in the forefront of making that happen. Not just in the United States, but it went all the way to the Vatican. It was a national petition drive to have a dialogue between Imam Muhammad and John Paul II. And so the Vatican got a good understanding of the Imam. And I think that, like I said, was the highlight of the interfaith dialogue for me to see that happen. Well, sometimes when we correct a situation, the corrections sometimes taken as an offense or as an affront, what do you perceive to be the damage or the harm that the Imam, other than in the church itself? What psychological damages or community-wide damages do you think was trying to be brought to the table? This was the Imam's main concern that Caucasians worshiping under a picture of a Caucasian man that they say is God causes a superiority complex in them. And it causes the opposite in African-Americans. They have this inferiority complex. So subsequently, they would perform really well in a society with these images. So the Imam didn't take them down, remove them because they're not supposed to be there anyway. In 1980, the Black Psychologist Association passed a bill, a bear witness to what Imam Muhammad said was true, that they should take the images down because subliminally, it's a subconscious manipulation. That subliminally, people were getting inferiority and superiority complexes. So the Imam said, this was a solution for racism. That's one element, take the picture down. Absolutely, very beautiful, very beautiful. Well, that shows the impact of the faith community being loyal to the core of faith that there's one God and whether your faith or not, the works of the faith community will have an impact on you. And it had an impact on society, very, very good. Imam Raqib Abdul-Jabbar, I just met you recently. Just met you last night, as a matter of fact. Thank you very much for that nice suit that you made for me. I'm sorry that I'm from tees in the audience. No, they missed out, it's all right, they missed out. Imam, in the interfaith movement, I know you travel nationally, internationally. You've been to many countries and you've done a lot of work in the world of chaplaincy across the board. How do you perceive dialogue and do you see the benefit or is there a harm that you may perceive in dialogue with others outside of the Islamic faith and how do you perceive that that dialogue should proceed or not? Bismillah. The dialogue, I see a benefit in the dialogue. It's just like you, ma'am, Alameen said, for us being raised as Muslims in this country, being of descent of Africans, either we came into Islam with Christian parents or one of our parents was influenced either by the movement in the 60s, either by the nation or even by Malcolm. Like my grandfather was a Garveyite and when my father came of age, he came into the nation and followed Malcolm. So when he introduced Islam to our family, my mother never became Muslim. My mother is still alive today. My mother's 88, my father's 91 and my mother's a Catholic. So that, for us, interfaith is natural. We don't have those predisposed attitudes that of trying to convince or beat someone over the head to come to our way. What I have found in my travels with the interfaith is that with that context, we approach it from a non-apologetic standpoint. We have nothing to apologize about being Muslim. It's nothing that we have to convince people of like our brothers that come from across the water. So being a chaplain in the prison system or in the hospital is very easy. It's more harder for them to accept us that we can accept them than it is for us to, for them to believe that we can automatically accept them on the standpoint of where they're coming from and just have a dialogue. The most enjoyment that I have working as a chaplain is in the hospital.  So when death comes to a person in the hospital, you'd be surprised how many people don't have anyone to talk to or don't have family that's coming to visit them. So in the hospital, people wanna talk. They got a lot to get off because being in the bed, being sick, you know, some kind of way, you trying to get right with your creator. And I did my CPE in a Catholic hospital, come to think of it. And I was the first Muslim chaplain that they ever had an African American Muslim at that. So, and it was an indigenous neighborhood, but they were very surprised that I was astute to their book as well as being able to talk to them just about life. So I think that interfaith dialogue, I think actually we need to find another word for maybe we just need to drop the interfaith and just call it dialogue. You know, human dialogue, you know, because faith doesn't play a factor when it comes to dealing with humanity because you're trying to find a base where we are equal at. But if you come in with religion first, we go on, I think Malcolm even said that, right? Well, he said, put it in the closet.  And then from there, we can settle our differences. Okay. Imam Abdul, I mean, Abdul Qadir, following up on that, interfaith is when you're engaging with others of faith, not necessarily of your own particular persuasion. That has been effective because everyone, not everyone, but many of us realize what we have in common, how much we have in common and why we should share with our shared values, the living space that we're in to try to make life better and different for not only ourselves, but for those who we as a faith community feel that we are charged with aiding, assisting and improving the conditions thereof. What experience have you had as an Imam and you yourself, I know, are world traveled, nationally traveled, have engaged on many, many levels with many people, what is the condition that you find in the inner faith, the intro faith, among Muslims that are as Imam Abdul Jabab pointed out that come into this environment, not having necessarily some have it because I've gone into Africa myself in different places where people don't seem to have a problem getting along with each other and accepting that people are okay in their own right with their faith, but some are more polarizing in their view and maybe even a little bit critical of those of us who would dare engage with those whom they would consider an enemy to us and to our faith and definitely to them. What has been your experience and how have you handled that or have you had that experience? Yes, thank you. Yes, I have had that experience. I find that sometimes, and this does not apply to everyone, but I've encountered individuals who are insecure within themselves and those people who are insecure with their own faith sometimes see someone else's faith as a threat to a position that they may hold and in cases like that, then it becomes this kind of competition. Us versus them kind of mentality. And I've had people tell me, why do you do interfaith? They're not gonna accept you. I said, well, you know, that's your position. That's not my position. My position is we live here together, we share the environment together, we have to establish relationships with one another. And so one individual pointed out a verse to me in the Quran that says they're not gonna accept you until you become like them. I said, well, they won't accept me then. But that's not the only thing the book says. So he pointed out that verse and there are many other verses that say that we should have dialogue, we should protect the places of worship of Christians and Jews and that we should recognize them for their sincerity. We recognize that they're governed by a book, we're governed by a book. So we have to bring to this our own thinking. Many of them are opposed to some ideas because of experience they may have had being under colonial powers. So these are some of the challenges that I've experienced. But I'd like to quote Muhammad Ali, who I saw a video where he was being questioned about his faith and he was being questioned about the differences in religion. And he pointed out, he said, are you familiar with lakes? Person said yes. He said, what about streams? He said yes. He said, what about ponds, oceans? And then he summed it up and I'm paraphrasing him. He said, it's all water. So when you think about faith, it's all faith. And none of us can speak absolutely. Though we may have absolute conviction, we are not absolute authorities.  The creator of law is gonna be the ultimate judge, not us. So when we bring it like that, I think it lowers the threshold of people keeping their guards up. I'm not trying to change Christians, except to make them better. And the same thing with other people that I encounter, I wanna see them to be the best they can be. At the same time, I believe that I have something that contribute to human beings growth, development, and enrichment. And that's Islam and the Quran and the life of Muhammad. Sala Allah. Sala Allah. And the great contributions of Muslim leaders, individuals like Imam Debbie Dean Muhammad, Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali, his whole funeral was a Dawa program. His whole geniza, he planned that it would introduce Islam to more people.  So that's extraordinary. And that's an excellent transition. Imam Antajana, you've written books. One that I wanna get, I'll talk about that out there. But you wrote a book and you had a program about fathers. And so the point, the reason I'm bringing this point up is the knowledge that we have as people that are produced through faith, our knowledge, our base, our foundation is our faith. Can you speak to the benefit of sharing what your faith has offered, has given to you, sharing that in the shared living space, in the general society, without the requirement of one becoming what you are? I think it, Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, he said, the only reason that he would came was that we would have good character. So like with the father's program, we're just talking to men about character, honesty, trustworthiness, integrity, morality, moral consciousness, again, it's across the board. It's across the board, I can go to any faith and talk about these characteristics that should be in a man. And so we start, and then the same thing with nature. If we look at husband, father, husband and men, agriculture, horticulture, dealing with animals, dealing with plants, so if you know how to grow plants, if you know how to raise animals, then that's a good prerequisite for raising a family. We've gotten away from that now, we're in the city now, we don't do that, but a long time ago, we were on the farm, we were in nature, and we had a lot more patients. Like the prophets, they were all sheepherders. And so it builds a certain amount of character and caring in this and stuff like that. So really we don't have to talk with religious labels to get our point across to make people better. We just deal with nature, we can deal with character development because all of the great spiritual leaders, that's what they were teaching. If we just boil it down, take away the labels and all that, what were they teaching? They were teaching people how to be morally conscious people, obedient to the Creator. So I think that this is what makes us, it gives us that extra incentive to have interfaith at the dialogue, because basically we're the same. Absolutely, that's beautiful. Well, we are coming to the end of this session. Perhaps there'll be a part two, but I think it has been absolutely fascinating to hear the depth of wisdom that has been exposed to myself and to those who are watching this program, coming from the three of you, and yet that wisdom is so simple, so available, so common, sensical, and it's wonderful. We're gonna talk a little bit more about some of the nuts and bolts of interfaith because all three of you gentlemen have brought up the point of really the nucleus of society and that being the family, that being the family, and there are some questions that I'm sure comes into the mind of the average person on any given day. One is inner marriage, because we live in a society, in societies and in communities where we do have ancestral and historical ties, family or familiar ties, and some of those ties have boundaries that though their ties are there, the relationships may be there, the association may be there, but there's a mechanics also that is there that requires that those of faith respect those boundaries and respect those mechanics. So on the next portion of this talk this evening, I would like to start off right back with Imam Rahib Abdul-Jabbar and begin that conversation more in depth about the inner workings of families, marriage, interfaith marriages, who can marry whom, and we'll just kind of take it from there. I think we need to kind of move back another veil and peel back another layer of the onion here. A serious veil right there, brother. Hopefully when we come back, we will be able to do that. So at this point, I'm going to say, Alhamdulillah, thank you very much. And we thank Allah, Subhanahu wa ta'ala for, and as God's highly glorified as He for allowing us this opportunity. And I pray that whatever is being said tonight is of a benefit. And I want our audience to know that whatever's being said here, if we have offended anyone, it is not deliberately. We're only explaining what we have as men of faith experience and are willing to share. And if we've said anything wrong, that is not valid, it is on us. And we ask God to forgive us, have mercy upon us and correct our speech, our behavior, and accept our good intentions. So I'll say at this point, peace be unto you. As-salamu alaikum, I am Imam Mikal Shabazz. See you soon.


than a 10-yard difference. Damovic standing in his own end zone. Mustangs are going to have an opportunity here. It's Vincent Lee back to get it. Remember, Franz was hurt on the last punt return. Lee takes it at his own 49-yard line coming to his lap.  He's tiptoeing the sideline. Did he stay in? Down to the 15. Makes a man miss. He's all the way home for a Mustangs touchdown. Nice, right down the sideline. Tiptoeing down the sideline. Kept his balance. There is a flag. Athletic return right there.


When I found out I was pregnant with Tayshia I found out I was like okay. I got to get everything straight get everything together and I felt something I was at work, and I felt something weird like Tayshia was not moving and I knew something was wrong when Tayshia was born She was one pound fourteen and a half ounces the prettiest of pinks. They put her in an incubator She stayed there for about a month and a half. So when I was born I was born really really small and Because of that I've had like problems throughout my life like when I was two I had bacterial meningitis and I also like as I grew older. I Had trouble gaining weight Rocky Mountain Youth Clinics All my kids have been there. They helped me really manage two kids and how to do what I needed to do and give me all The best advice. They made my life easier I met Kate in 2013 and At first like I didn't want to talk to nobody because I don't really like talking to doctors But when I met Kate it was really fun because like I connected with her because she because it's easy to talk to her and She helped me a lot. I met Tayshia and her mom Stephanie in 2013 through the Thrive Clinic part of working with Stephanie and Tayshia has really been helping her to understand her own complex medical needs So helping Tayshia really really grasp and feel what she needs to feel When she's going to specialists and how to cope and process all of those different demands through her journaling Her poetry and her art I think has really helped her as well as being able to really talk to her mom about everything that she's feeling When I look at my children today I see the impact that Rocky Mountain New Clinics has had on my children. I see how much they're thriving They started out so small and now they're living beautiful lives Through Tayshia's hard times and health struggles. She has remained unbelievably optimistic She has nothing but a bright future ahead of her The Tayshia that I know today is a completely different person that I met several years ago She's come so far and she's learned so much about herself and I couldn't be more proud of the person she is today. I Love working with little kids. I'm a good babysitter. I kids like me I have fun with them. So when I get older I want to open a daycare For my daycare center already thought about a name and a motto for it And my daycare name is going to be sunshine daycare and the motto is taking care and making smiles


To the boys' side, Grand Rapids at Duluth Marshall tonight. Early on, Hilltoppers threatening, but Thunderhawk net miner Gabe Hollam says, uh-uh, with the save here. Marshall will break through right before the first intermission. Carter, Sullivan scores, 1-0 Hilltoppers, and later this time Keelan, goalie behind the defense. Gets one pass, hol'em for another. Duluth Marshall would go on to win this one final score, 2-0. If you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS.