What I said is that good afternoon my friends and family that we're here to talk about the Puyum Puyuk Mim which is the mountain waters that are sacred that come down throughout the valley to the ocean and what does that have to do with the climate change and the understanding that people need to catch up with what Mother Nature already built already designed already made it perfect for us to live here on this land and we have done a number of things as people creating this society as it is now where money have been coming more important even than water even though most of us know from our own experience in our history that no life can continue without pure good water including ours and why we choose to jeopardize that basic knowledge still is a wonder why people would think that money is a better way to go than protecting the rights of the water and you know I'm from a mountain where we drink water directly from the source it's not you know filtered or anything happens to it no chlorine no fluoride and I think that most people haven't a clue what real water tastes like and I'm sad to say that your water here really tastes different it's a taste that I don't really like and it looks like water it feels like water but for us it probably isn't water it's something else it's a wet liquid you know it's some sort of odd tea seems like to me so that's part of the issues that we're facing is that not enough people have a memory that goes back to a time when you could drink from the spring or stream or river and right now the common knowledge is that you can't that if you go hiking even to the pristine waters in the mountains that you should carry your water in or you should have a filtering system or you should boil it or something you need to do to the water and all of this still doesn't bring about like it like people to be upset with it and instead we're so complacent that we accept it it's just the way it is instead of being appalled that it's turned this way and that we should be doing something about it and instead we say we can't do anything about it because we can't change we can't change it the way that it's been the way that things have happened to water yet we know nothing exists without water and it's a very very short time that you can exist without water you know you might live what 14 days 15 days if you're really strong without water and so it's a it's a kind of a odd thing to me that so many millions of people have become complacent about the water issues in california you know we're in drought we've been in drought for a very long time yet we're still fracking we're still building new fracking industry and we know that fracked water cannot be used again do we have enough water to have one more fracking mine before it tilts and we're fighting for drinking water which i think that we're fighting for drinking water now yet we're not strong enough to make those changes and maybe not quick enough because you know we're fighting against crystal geyser on mount shasta from taking more water from a volcanic aquifer no science knows what happens to an aquifer that is surrounding a volcano or the temperature changes when you draft off unlimited amounts of cold water pool from a volcano you know and maybe there'll be some people who live beyond that who can go and study it and come up with the result of what happened when they draft it off too much water from a volcano but do we want to go there do we really want that you know i think not i think that creator put that together in a way that is supposed to warn us you know when when the volcanoes explode for us that's in our story telling is is that that is a sign that we need to make some changes in what we're doing not just a coincidence not just a seismic activity of the earth but it is the voice of the earth telling us giving us a chance you know to make some changes and same with the earthquakes the earthquakes are telling us about fracking that we should stop that because here it comes you know here comes these earthquakes they're telling us and we're looking at it and the scientists are already relating fracking activity to a number of increased earthquakes including in humble county i mean how many of you know how many fracking mines are in california yeah there's thousands yeah they're in places you don't even know that they are and they're considered clean energy yet just like nuclear power is considered clean energy and so is coal considered clean energy yet the water that is used in these processes um they have no idea and no way to fix it they can't it's not even like a a sewer system a sewer system you can change and you can filter it out and you can make that water drinkable again by all because that's what mother nature does it has a process of filtering out and changing and and giving back to these underground aquifers clean water to be stored for every living thing but fracking water um is not going to do that you can't reuse it you can't do anything with it and so i think you know as we go along people have to get more knowledge about the processes that are happening and about the effects because while we rely on science a great deal to protect us to some degree on these new projects or new things that are being built or exercised that we have to start asking the questions how much water in california are we polluting every day i mean taking clean drinkable water and we convert it to contaminated water what's the amount every day every hour do we know that we don't know that they don't talk about it right but in their eir's they have to say how many gallons of water will be used and how many gallons of water will be a waste waste water they call it they don't call it contaminated poison toxic water which they should call it because it's more than wastewater but we don't know we don't keep track of all these projects that are happening throughout our state uh and we we become complacent about water just like with crystal geyser nestlies and all of those who are tapping into our systems of water bottling it up leaving the other half contaminated water for us to deal with and shipping the water to other countries from a state that is in drought why do we allow that you know because we don't know or because it's just you know we have to share our water with everybody in the world and uh we're getting some sort of a benefit from it you know i don't see that i see nestlies getting rich and richer and doing things that was switzerland would not let them do there but they come to these countries they come to these communities that are maybe less educated about water laws and they exercise a power to extract water for the sales everywhere so they just get richer and richer you know crystal geyser advertises on their website for mount shasta that they're going to be selling flavored waters yeah flavored waters are going to come out of mount shasta it's like really and i did talk with the president of the bottle watering industry out of washington dc and i said to him we drink straight from the springs on mount shasta it doesn't go through any processes even the town has no real filtration system for their homes they drink straight from the source and i said what do you do to the bottle water when you extract it well the first thing they do is they put the uh disinfectant in the water it's like what would you be disinfecting when all of the people here just drink it straight from the source so you're taking pristine water you're contaminating it with disinfectant and then you're adding something to it and then you're selling it as spring water it's like and we buy it right we have no idea that uh you know you can buy nestle's product here in california that's made from mount shasta or somewhere else and you can buy the same thing in poland and those two waters will taste the same because the customers expect it to taste the same whether or not you get it in guatemala or ecuador or anywhere it's going to taste the same every bottle of water tastes the same so if it's going to taste the same why are we destroying all these springs and mountain systems to extract this water for bottling to to sell you know it's a problem that we need to wake up to there are many situations that we need to wake up to or our college systems need to start talking about it our students need to be starting to have rationality about the water issues you know 30 years ago my grand said that water will be so scarce that so many diseases will come from it because the water will be so low and contaminated that the people won't know what to do about it they'll they'll be respiratory systems that are affected by these water problems and we're going into it um like frogs in a pot you know uh i don't know if you know that frogs in a pot that term means that if there's a frog in the water and the water begins to warm the frog doesn't notice until he's dead but you put a frog in hot water and they're going to jump right otherwise it's just gradually happening and we don't recognize it that's what's happening to the people all of this gradual stuff uh that's happening with our water our air and we're convinced that we can't live without it when in fact uh we have before you know all of the communities have lived and at some point in time without all of the commodities and without all of the modernization of comfort and there's something to be said about uh societies that are built for their environments uh survive meaning like in the arctic people in the arctic have knowledge and technology and systems in place that they can continue to exist there but if we went up there in the arctic chances are we we probably will not know and our bodies are not conditioned to be any colder than you know what is it 70 degrees 68 degrees because that's where you turn down your air conditioners to 68 or 65 degrees you know and um and then we turn it up it's like okay 70 degrees or 75 degrees and we have this very short range of living condition that we can tolerate and we've we've given this to generations of us right so if it really gets too cold we lose a lot of people to uh storms and weather weather changes um icing of towns that shut down their systems most people don't know how to get along you know if you shut down all the supermarkets most people won't know of a food source you know but we don't know how vulnerable that we are and we don't want to think that that would ever ever end that'll never stop but our water systems you know uh we have these exotic things like water bottling but then we also have food processing like uh growing all of these products for the domesticated animals you know they take more water than not for pigs and and cows and alfalfa and corn to to feed them while we're convinced that we have to do these water projects in california because people don't have drinking water it's like we have a whole array of things that need to be fixed and changed and we have the technology that could change it to a better way but we don't use it because i'm thinking the people who get the money from the sources is a handful of people who have convinced everybody else that they have to have it this way and we're not willing to take a risk that they might be lying right but at one point in time like i said earlier many many families and houses and farms were off grid and they survived and they had healthier food when they canned their own peaches they canned their own tomatoes they had real food and nowadays you know you're buying food that's full of preservatives full of sugar full of corn syrup you know which isn't as healthy for us but we're convinced that we can live longer right if we eat like that um but for um for the environment itself we have to establish a relationship i think everybody needs to have a relationship with your environment when you're in a what what grams would call a stagnant environment is one that has exotic flowers and lawns that they don't know anything and and those people who only go to groomed parks as their outdoor recreation um idea that there are no stickers there there's no you know everything is so groomed that children playing in these places certainly probably are safe but are they learning anything about their environment i mean most kids don't know what the smell of dry grass smells like they have no clue they have no clue what the native plants are here or what's edible what's not edible what's a weed what what came in you know we don't we don't have that knowledge per se but maybe we should you know start thinking about our own levels of the future you know like my grandma said when she um was much older she said you know i do these things for my seven generations my time here is up whatever happens now you know isn't going to affect me i'm going to be gone it's all of you kids and your kids is kids that's going to be here and have to have to figure out what what they could do but i think that you know if we don't look around and start getting some practical knowledge like i was saying about the little white butterfly and the pine tree you know people go to the go to the recreational areas to enjoy the woods the forest go camping up on lake shasta you know but a lot of those campers they come in with these big RVs and their motorboat and their motorcycle and their tv antenna and their rig and that's recreating right they have their bicycle and they're recreating in the forest but really they're not they're not understanding that this pine tree that's leaking all this pitch that that pitch is a medicine and that you know nothing like that is is really a part of their experience other than seeing a tree you know and it's seeing a tree in a different way like seeing a picture of a tree whereas if you're there in the mountains you would know that the snow melts first around the bottom of the tree and you would know that trees will look half white and half green in in the winter time and so when you draw pictures of trees you don't see anybody drawing picture of a half white tree because on the shaded side of the tree it's still frozen it still has the white dust of the snow and on the sun side it's all melted and screen but who notices that kind of detail when you're out in the woods when you're when you're experiencing the mother nature's way of working to provide all of us with what we need you know with the air that we need with the waters that we need you know they're just now starting to study the root system of the trees and I did hear that they were going to go and cut a lot of trees down because they thought the trees were using too much water it was like oh my gosh we have a long way to go but whatever you see on the top of the ground is in the ground under that tree and the root systems are entwined with each other to hold themselves up in the communities of the trees and yet we don't we don't realize that you know we're we're into renewable resources and we can just plant those things and and we still have them yet we don't recognize that what we're doing is planting an orchard in the forest we have an orchard of trees that are going to be the same size grow the same height be knocked down the same time and they're not really a forest you know it's not where the birds and everything chooses to live when you have a forest you also have all of those things that are choosing to live there because everything there is what they need but our replanted forests don't provide that they don't provide that and we still don't have a policy of areas that we say we're going to let them grow for a hundred years before we cut them a hundred years it's like 40 years and they're coming back to cut them but we don't recognize that we came from a state that had these huge trees you know even in our area under the lake when the lake recedes we see these stumps because they cut all the trees when the dam came in but we have this one stump that's under it's an oak tree that was like 12 and a half feet in diameter who sees that anymore a 12 and a half foot oak at the base of the trunk it's almost like a story right it's like a make believe story it's like the hundred pound salmon it's like who sees those anymore you're making that up you know but on battle creek they did find a salmon in the carcass of a salmon that was 85 pounds but through our hatchery system we have created a salmon that's basically the same size just like we're making these trees the same size you know in the early days of the hatchery process and and even probably now it's they don't have that diversity but it was people who milk the male salmon onto the eggs well nobody wanted to lift the 85 pound squirmy flopping salmon right so they lifted the smaller ones and so they created these generations of smaller salmon by not using the diversity of the large salmon and now you know we have these studies that kind of pin us in that 100 pound 85 pound salmon are pretty rare but studies don't go back as far as we did you know because when they started like my dad's generation started seeing the 40 pound salmon as the normal salmon coming up they were saying how small those salmon are right those salmon are pretty small these days while everybody else is saying gee look how big this fish is you know how they had to fight it to get it in all of that right but they don't really recognize what was already here or the processes that were already here and that some way we have to find our way back if we want to if we want to change climate and we can't really change it we can only put back what was here that sustained climate like our our large trees we need the large trees like the wolves you know wolves in california are very detrimental to the to the water issues and maybe you say why would the wolf be a part of the water system well one the wolf is a fisherman but aside from that he maintains a high mountain meadows and the way that he does it is that you know our meadows nowadays are all being encroached by vegetation because the wolf is not there when the wolf is present you don't have the other animals who eat grass and stuff encroaching on the meadow changing the hydrology of the ground as well as eating all of the plants off and not eating from the edge of the meadow that keeps it wide when the wolves are there he's a predator of those animals like deer and rabbits and every everyone else that goes in to do that and so they eat on the edges of the meadow because they don't want to be prime dinner right and and they're not impacting the heart of the meadow it's remained soft and spongy by the voles and they eat on the edge of the meadow keeping vegetation from growing into the meadow that's why he's a waterkeeper you know but all of these things that I don't think science has caught up with the effects of everybody's jobs everybody's here for a reason that kind of filters into our own life you know like we were telling Peter Moyle yesterday is that the Indians on the river and the salmon have stories together we relied on each other there's a dependency together and one of those ways of looking at things is that there's always been high water years wet water years dry drought years all of that but in the drought years it was the people who had dip netting skills that dip netted the salmon to help them get above the jumps that they couldn't make during a low water year so that they could go to their spawning ground so there was a basic understanding that you didn't look at the pool and say hey I look at all those fish for me you know you looked at all the fish and saying oh those poor fish they can't get to where they're supposed to be I have to help them I can't just take them all and eat them all I have to help them and doing that you know and and that's a different way of thinking about things you know even in the hunting seasons it's like uh there wasn't this uh trophy hunter kind of uh you know uh need for the hunters in fact it was frowned upon if you brought back the biggest rack of a deer it was frowned upon because you have interrupted the generational um processes of this giant deer to affect all populations behind him and so uh large deer like that the big antlers they were allowed to walk away you wouldn't take that one because he's going to produce more large deer if you take him maybe there won't be that big a deer anymore and so there was there was a process of a selection of which which animals was more likely to be not as affected in the chain of life as others but nowadays you know it is the the giant horns it is it is that you know it's um a crazy thing that uh trophy hunting has done to people because we're not reliant on that as a food source hunting and fishing have now dropped into the categories of recreation instead of sustenance you know where the tribes are still in the mindset of sustenance uh and the and the reliability of um the process of salmon from ocean to the high mountain streams and seeing the indications of whether or not it's a good year or a bad year you know now it seems like the uh Indian people who have fisheries are indicating that uh we have big problems with water we have salmon coming back upstream that are uh deformed we have them coming back upstream that have bugs in them and um different growths that are on them these are all indicators that our water system is collapsing not that the fish are having a bad year the overall we have to pay attention to you have a question yeah you know about the water project in california uh we believe that it's all one project you know you have the delta tunnels that they say is a separate project that's going to be built big enough to divert the entire river of the sacramento they say they won't and i asked them why they said we don't have the permit but they're going to spend the money to build them big enough that they can why would they do that if they're not going to it's a waste of money to build them oversized then you have sites reservoir which is right out here um in williams that they're going to build it's on the uh governor's list of wet water projects for prop one funds there's no way to fill sites there's no running river uh streams year-round streams that would go into sites reservoir to fill it they will have to pump from water from the sacramento river to fill sites reservoir in order to do that because they are pumping as much water out of the sacramento now that they couldn't possibly pump more to fill sites so that brings us to the chassadam rays and they have to build chassadam higher so that they can catch more of the runoff water which will then be shipped to sites to fill sites uh during winter year winter months and start building up the water storage at sites by the overflow uh from shasta in orville but uh it doesn't make sense you know uh shasta dam is over 85 feet uh 85 excuse me a second she's coming if you want to stop and take a drink of water then i could circulate the rest of the evaluations oh oh sure sure clipboard no no no i don't know how you guys recommend it which is a sad thing for things a piece of water you know we uh we went to san diego one year and they were hosting a spiritual wellness conference at the san diego hotel right there at the town and country by the san diego river right and so i had some of my young people with me and they asked us to do a women's blessing down by the river and so we said oh yeah you know we could do that we'd love to do that we went outside and it's like where is the river and then we walked around the hotel and we couldn't find the river and then they came out and we said well you know we'd love to do that blessing but we can't find the river to set our stuff up so we walk around the other side and they said this is the river and it's this chocolate brown stream running by the hotel that was the san diego river and if you've seen um mccloud river it's pretty pristine i mean you can see to the bottom of it it's nice and cold and bubbly and a lot aerated it it smells good it tastes good as compared to that and so our young people looked around and thought oh the little mouths dropped open it's like wow that's the you can't you got to be kidding us right you're kidding us that looks like a sewer ditch and then we saw up river there was somebody fishing and they said oh they're not going to eat anything out of there but it was a shock you know and then i showed them the the la river it's like what what happened to this you know and and the the things that people become accustomed to doing and seeing impacts our ability to change anything you know and for them it was like oh they need to free that river you know get that concrete out of there but uh when when you have populations that grow a custom to it it's it's harder it's like the frogs in the pot you know they don't they don't see a difference generation after generation it's just the way it is but as far as the Shasta dam rays they want to build it 18 and a half feet higher which will essentially be like 22 feet higher they'll have to do a clear cut around the lake cutting all the trees up to 25 or 30 feet from the new water's edge and they say that that would be the keystone to the california waterfix but in reality you know we we have sacred places still along the river we've lost 26 miles of the river the first time they put the dam in they've never really justified that there's an act of congress that says they'll give us life land to live on move our cemeteries and give us an infrastructure to continue our way of life well none of that has happened they did move 183 gravesites to a central place in old Shasta I mean not old Shasta but Shasta Lake cities where it was supposed to continue to be our cemetery so now they have transferred that land into the BLM land banks and if you know anything about BLM they don't allow burials on their lands yet it's a practicing burial place so we have a problem there right but in addition to that there's been no land given to us so we have no land on the McLeod river and they'd had no in fact there's a letter that says the best thing you can do for those Indians is to move them out of there why give them an infrastructure to live in a place that's unlivable so that that's the commissioner of Indian affairs to the president and so none of the other guarantees of the act happened for the 26 miles of river in a way of life and you have to realize that the minimum never came down to join in the new developments of modernization they always remained on the river and always wanted to remain on the river well at that building of the dam whatever happened to the salmon happened to us the salmon were no longer allowed to come back to their homelands and neither were the winimum and so that in itself is an issue that's over here and everybody goes well they don't even name that act of Congress that allowed them to fill the lake on top of our lands but you know there's problems with legal legal remedies and all that kind of thing but the other part of it is is that we asked them if you did raise it even if you raise it 200 feet higher because that's what they were initially intending for the dam to be 200 feet higher it's supposed to be an 800 foot dam they stopped at 602 feet because the war was pretty much over the money was running pretty thin and they ended it right but if even if they did the water that would be captured in Lake Shasta would not make an iota a difference in the percent needed by the people in the south it'd be a drop in the bucket of the need to address the issues of how we're using water right but the other issue that people don't think about too is is that in 1850 you know the people came to the state why gold they came for gold and they came in the hundreds of thousands into the state and that's what happened to the Indian people is that there was an actual policy by the first governor of california to exterminate all the Indians so you could make your money killing Indians men women children babies whatever or finding gold and so that was the that happened so there was a lot of mining that was exercised on a lot of the rivers including the Sacramento river the mccloud river we were still what they say wild enough to keep the miners out so the miners never got to dredge up the mccloud river they never got to find out whether or not there were pots of gold on the mccloud river because of the fierce nature of the tribe that was there and because it was far enough away in a canyon that they couldn't you know they didn't just encroach and live like like on dunes mirror that was the way of the railroad and so the the tribes along the mccloud i mean the Sacramento river going that way had less of a chance because there were so many people coming and they kept coming and they kept coming on the mccloud you would know they would be coming up on the buckboard right you could hear them and so they could be stopped more easily by the the tribe and and they did but on the Sacramento river there was a lot of mining and for nickel for copper for iron and they did a lot of hydro mining at that time as well and and you know that there's a hydro mine up there called iron canyon that continually bleeds the poisons that eventually in the winter time in a wet year it'll dump over and it goes down the Sacramento river nobody wants to talk about that and they don't want to talk about that it continually bleeds and they don't know how to stop it they've tried a number of methods and they can't stop it from bleeding it's left over from the mining time well on the Sacramento and under the Shasta Lake there are also hydro mining activity that took place and all of that metal and is exposed to the lake and as long as three rivers run down to fill Lake Shasta there's a movement of sediment that has moved to the bottom of the dam and so nobody's talking about the 60 foot of toxic sludge at the base of the dam or what to do about it but us right we're saying if you dredged out that 60 foot of toxic sludge that's on the bottom of this lake you would have more room for volume of water you wouldn't even have to build it higher if you took that out because you're gonna you're gonna build it 20 feet higher and you got 60 feet if you just dredged it out new and clean and they said well we don't know it'd be pretty expensive and we don't know what we would do with that toxic waste and so you're just gonna build it higher you're gonna leave it there and it's still gonna continue to accumulate and you're gonna put water on top of it that's the answer and so you know we were we were complaining to them that the fish have mercury poison well did you test them it's like no we didn't test them but we see it we see it you don't have to be a scientist to know when a fish has mercury poison you know even in the taste of them you know and so finally just this last year I don't know if you saw the report from I think it was Sacramento B or LA Times reporter had talked about the the Shasta Lake and the mercury poisoning of the fish because we have been asking the Forest Service when are you gonna put up signs to warn the people that these fish have mercury poisoning and that was like eight years ago right and we still haven't seen any signs because we were asking well how many languages will you put that up in because this is a world renowned lake that people come out from all over to come here not one sign has gone up not one meeting about the what to do about the mercury-infested fish still even after the the article that came out pointing to that and so we have problems with the Shasta Dam on a technical scientific basis you know not just us being in the way of another raise of the water over our sacred sites which affects who we are how do we remain to be Winamom when that's the only place that we can go to learn how to be Winamom we can't go to Hoopa and still learn how to be Winamom we can't go to Cherokee or Arizona and learn how to be Winamoms we have to be in the Winamom territory to be Winamom to raise our children Winamom to know all that we know about our own traditional territory so we're affected big time by this raise but everybody else you know maybe they don't care about cultures or maybe they don't care about tribes and maybe they look at us as a small handful of people standing in a way of millions of people who need water but the bottom line is is that we're standing in this handful of people in objection to raising this dam against a handful of people who want to make money off of this Westlands Water District Metropolitan Water District all of the GMO farmers Resnick's farms all of these people stand to get richer than they are I mean they're powerful enough right now and everybody you know doesn't realize that the Shassadam fix is not for the people it is not to give more water to independent farmers they're still going to buy that water from the brokers at horrible prices already they're selling water that they get for 20 dollars an acre foot subsidized they're selling for anywhere from 400 to 2500 an acre foot depending on who's bidding at the time and who needs the water at the time so this handful of people is what we're dealing with but they want to make it out that we're standing in the way of all the people getting water and it's like if all the people knew that you know LA is not going to get any more water than they can buy and the prices are going to be very very high that the small towns like Seville and Alpaw and all the ones in on the corridor of Fresno Stockton foothills are not rich enough to buy that water even the place in Tuolumne their water allotment ran out and the Tuolumne tribe utilized their water right to bring water for that town otherwise they wouldn't have water they didn't have no more money they ran out of their allocation you know that's how evil this water war is going to get and we don't realize it right now because we think the government is making plans to help everybody but the government is not putting themselves in charge of the distribution or of that water they're putting water districts in it right and you know that they have the money to do it like everybody said Diane Feinstein's bill for the water fix was this scattergun approach you know to desal drought groundwater reservoirs raising you know it's just this massive water fix well February 10th came out her her next version of it Shasta dam is on it as authorized to raise as part of the water fix as is governor brown pushing the delta tunnels and the same thing is true with the delta no one has seen a delta die if you take all of the fresh water out of a delta it's no longer a delta it's no longer an estuary it's an inlet and when you change that you're changing this whole flyway system you're changing all of the fish that are in that that system that need fresh water you're changing all the plants that are growing within that structured area and you're changing all of the salmon runs for the major rivers in california and they say they're not going to right they're just going to dig out these two giant holes in the delta and place their tunnels down so nobody sees that they're probably as big as his room their four lane highway size tunnels now they're trying to call them pipes because in people's minds pipes are smaller than tunnels and so it's a word word play on people too but they're building them so big that they will be able to divert the entire sacramental river and right now the motto of the state is is every drop of water to the ocean is a wasted drop right that's the big tagline and and farmers feed america people are fish it's like what do you think the fish are gathering up their arms against you it's like now the fish are marching on us here comes the salmon it's like this is dreamlike enemy the fish are our enemy and we couldn't possibly allow them to live you know and right now the delta smelt are nearly gone and uc davis here has been charged with rearing them in their tanks on campus to try to save the delta smelt rather than allow them to live in their natural habitat by moving the pumps and diverting the water at different times of year and instead the thought is well those little fish are just in the way of us growing food for the world right we're going food for the world but this little finger-sized fish they say is our enemy you know they're on the last leg per se like there was they've been here for over 6,000 years native fish to the delta and necessary fish for the acclimation of the salmon and other species that utilize that delta smelt and 99.5 percent of them have given up their lives for the delta pumping system and now we just have to go after that last one percent because they're still in our way and we don't recognize the effect of losing the delta smelt on the salmon runs on anything it's like we're so removed from that that the delta smelt is like nobody catches that nobody eats that nobody does you know it doesn't benefit us right up front it's not a moneymaker and so we don't give them importance but as tribal people know that the delta smelt is very important to the overall ecology of the entire delta and that once you take start taking out these pieces it's like the little white butterfly if they poison the little white butterfly eventually there'll be no trees because they won't reproduce the same is true of the delta smelt that's why it's such a disaster tragedy for them to you know not consider them a part of our environment a part of our system and then after they do this after if they get the build the tunnels they're going to pull out all this toxic dirt from the bottom of the delta right because the ships have gone in and wherever the ships go in there's a lot of toxic waste that's circulating on the bottom so they're going to build this and you know what they're going to do with that dirt they're going to build a wetland so not only are we taking this toxic dirt out that we shouldn't but now we're going to give them to the flyway bird system so all the birds flying up and down our our sink is going to be sitting in that toxic dirt that they're going to pump water into and they say they're going to create 100 100 more acres of wetlands for the birds out of that okay all right well there's so many things to to think about and talk about but right now you know we've we passed out a little flyer we're trying to find a champion in the system that would actually speak up or help talk about these things help the tribe um and the salmon our main focus is bringing the salmon back because we believe that once those salmon get back into that river many things will change there's a magic that happens when they come back that isn't there now and so we're crippled in that way but when they come back maybe more eyes will be opened maybe more hearts will feel the difference maybe more people will understand our connectedness with our mother earth and and that um we are not smarter than they are that's what you know we have to recognize all of the science and all the studies on the salmon are incomplete and are only on the terms of what human people want to think but salmon have more information about our systems than we do and we should follow them and so we're following the salmon and we're trying to open up that waterway so they can come back on their own and utilize that entire system and have major effects on climate when they swim up and turn the rocks over and they deposit their um nutrients the whole mountain the whole system is better the meadows retain more water the trees retain more water there's condensation that happens in the water system that people don't count that our major water performance throughout the year you know people are trained to only look at a reservoir and say whether or not we have water or not but did you notice that our reservoirs especially fulsome was like dirt dirt down there 11 full a mud hole while reservoirs in the southern part of the state were completely full what kind of drought is that that leaves us with no water and fills the lakes down there like they got rain and we didn't yeah it's a selective frame makes you think that we're in dire drought state but we're not we're in dire um choices people are making choices about our water and how to use that water and what they can do but we really have to rethink a lot of things and and a lot of it i don't understand because they say you know california feeds the entire world with almonds or china gets major almonds from the state so it's important to grow almonds in the desert you know i don't know but if you drive up by the i5 corridor you see all these brand new little trees coming up in the desert you know something is wrong with our thinking and so there needs to be a paradigm shift of what we're capable of doing what we need to do and we have to wake up you know we have to start participating with these water district meetings because i can guarantee you that um just like the site's project for the governor they have a chief of staff for that that chief of staff is an employee of the westlands water district and so these things they say there is no conflict of interest but even on the governor staff they have another water district westlands water district person uh designing the plan for the governor you know and so we have to wake up and start realizing that we shouldn't have that means like the frankenfish i don't know if you heard of frankenfish they're developing this well they have the guy from aqua bounty who is the lab that's developed frankenfish on the food and drug administration uh leading the approval of the frankenfish it's like you know we'd be better with a homeless person in there who has a sense of like his environment he has a sense of you know getting by and knowing uh how to how to survive you know uh there are decisions being made by people who will never have to live it you know just like a mount shasta you know we're fighting crystal geyser and people utilize mount shasta you know around the world but they get the fly in they get to do whatever they're gonna do and then they fly home and we're left with whatever runs off of mount shasta because we're all downhill from there so we have we have a lot of work to do but i think um the more people start talking about things and start caring about things um and start with their own homes stop using fertilize stop using roundup stop using antiseptic dish soap you know start uh buying more organic and get away from gmo's because the money issue pushes these guys to continue what they're doing you know i think there was enough issue in the organic processes that these major gmo companies started buying up the gmo companies i mean the the organic companies so that their supermarkets can now you know but they're still getting all the profit from that and they're still regulating how much organic food can go on the market at what price because we used to all all be organic and it was pretty cheap but now organic anything that's good for you cost a lot of money right and so uh i just want to thank you guys for coming out and being here and inviting me there's a lot of things that churches across the the nation around the world really need to start sitting down with indigenous peoples who are struggling to protect their homelands but it's not only their homelands but it's a signature for the world's existence yeah the the other the other issue that uh you need to be aware of that whenever you join in uh defending mother earth or it seemed to be this is that you'll have a number of enemies and you'll be targeted and we go through that uh uh we've survived a couple of uh crippling blows to the tribe uh and they remain you know they continue to keep us poor so that we can't really make an impact and so social media and talking out like this is our basic weapon to defend and try to educate and help all of us understand you know what your circle can do so thank you very much


This research aimed to identify and address issues related to the supply chain in a hospital in Matanzis, Cuba. It was found that the lack of coordination among the various actors involved in the supply chain was the main issue affecting the efficiency of the system. Additionally, it was determined that the hospital could benefit from improved communication and collaboration between the various stakeholders. This article was authored by Ana Julia Acevedo Naif Sablan Cocio, Jose Antonio Acevedo Suarez, and others.


We're gonna have to go back to the backdoor set play to try and back off each Tennessee State or someone in white's gonna Have to drive and beat their man one-on-one Both teams have three turnovers early on good It's a good passing team for East Tennessee State and Hodges drills of three From the senior the only senior for East Tennessee James Harrison ballot creates Jefferson's back in Ballack launches and hits So just like that out of the timeout No doubt he was told hey look look to shoot Boyd thought about a three Tisdale Rodriguez strong inside jump hook another great junior college 27 They've averaged 23 second chance points a game through two contests. So Really good on the glass bad pass by Boyd Alexander Count it well rich. That's a weight room finish right there Boyd's back in he's a shooter This is good. He's been playing the point. Remember Paul Hodges has two fouls He's been on the bench a lot and a dip. Oh my goodness with the spin trade Boyd the third Three Jefferson and he hits that too Versatile strong and an impact guy that before free throws and the bonus good Feeds the post armist left hand won't go ripped away kickback out good launches and hit it big bucket for the bucket ears 20 seconds left in this first half Mints Alexander great defense good close-up from Hodges able to take away the three-point jumper and the drive Mints driving and finishing Davey on mints the junior It's better to be that at this point is a sophomore than the other way. Yeah, it's easier to dial that up But the other day it's at some point got a kind of change Rodriguez calling for the ball good rises with three and hits it's Patrick Good He's a hometown kid, but nevertheless the complexion of the game has to change if you're Greg McDermott And so sometimes you switch things up defensively and it can just alter the game Boyd in the lane Little ten footer Hodges There's boy. Whoa quick release buries a three biggest lead for the bucket ears But as you pointed out Steve Forbes had an opportunity to not draw up some things against the zone here during that break Yeah, the timeout came right after the change good again Three my goodness just a one-on-one iso on the wing Jefferson feeds the post got it back Skips it Alexander three and he hits it shot ready if you're Alexander trailing his bow Blue jays with a ball and a one-point lead Alexander for a second seeing thinking the ball screens gonna come back Crane wants the ball of Alex hands fries are gonna play this out Rodriguez reaching no foul there ballot driving and kicking


the first one you're giving out is one I like a lot because the quarterback that's slated to start hasn't had more than one full season with this team and that's the starting quarterback for the san francisco 49ers jimmy garoppolo only 2019 is when he had a full season played in his four years in san francisco you're going plus 750 on the rookie quarterback tray lance to win rookie of the year why yeah let's throw it back let's let's go tray lance and give me the plus 750 of these odds I couldn't believe it aerial when I was looking at this he's the he's the longest odds of the four main quarterbacks that that we talked about with Trevor Lawrence and and Zach Wilson as well being in that mix in justin fields as well and it's you just look at this and you're like okay so the everybody's high on san francisco coming out of the the NFC I believe that you know their their odds to win the Super Bowl very favorable their odds to you know get into the playoffs also very favorable and it's so jimmy g he's not going to complete the full season he hasn't shown us that he would be able to do since they've made the Super Bowl the 49ers that was a couple years back so let's bring in you know tray lance who they just hedged the farm to bring this kid in of three first round picks you got Kyle shanahan he's canceling OTAs because guys are getting hurt and he doesn't want to relive what just happened in the 2020 season when the defense was banged up and they saw injuries all across the court we'll talk about another guy on this team but this team is really in a good position to to compete for a title and when you're looking at rookie of the year bets I do love getting him at this because if he comes out and starts being the explosive guy that we saw him be in college with the rushing upside and with the past game ability with the weapons that he has in george kittle brandon iuk debo samuel and others I think you can really get ahead of the curve here I wouldn't be surprised if he's starting you know earlier than even a guy like justin fields who's backing up andy dalton so give me the plus money at 750 here 75 7.5 odds to one for tray lance to get rookie of the year ryan the reason I love this pick at tray lance plus 750 to win rookie of the year is because you're basically betting on jimmy garoppolo to start more than six games or not if he doesn't start more than six games lance is going to be the quarterback with a ton of weapons in san francisco


I'm so happy to be here at a five o'clock block with global connections, and we're connected with Professor Yoichiro Sato with Ritsumeikin Asia Pacific University, and he is a specialist in international affairs, and geopolitics in Asia and elsewhere, and we have so much to talk with him today. Hi, Sato-san. You there? Hello, yes. Good afternoon. Yeah, Mr. Sato has been on ThinkTech many times, and we always enjoy seeing him. He's been here. He's been there, and we like catching up with him. We want to do that. So this all came through my attention by PacNet32. PacNet32 is a code of an article that Mr. Sato wrote for Pacific Forum, and it appeared on their newsletter, and it was entitled, A Dealmaker Trump Tees Up His Game of Trade War, a very provocative title. And it was a, you know, I must say, Sato-san, you really know how to write English. You know, I was a lawyer practicing for many years, and I was always interested in the quality of English that our associates used, and your English is so precise and so careful and so expressive, you know, and this article was so well-written, honestly, I must say that. I wouldn't always say that, but I say that in this case with you. So my compliments to you on this article. Thank you. In any event, I would like to cover this subject because it's a way of looking at the article covers, a way of looking at the relationship between the United States, the Trump administration, and China in the context of the trade wars, but from the viewpoint of Japan. Because Japan is involved, like it or not, Japan is a comparison, Japan is a beneficiary, Japan is somebody who is going to have, you know, benefits or disadvantages as a result of what happens in this trade war, this tariff war. And I wonder if you could give me a handle on how it looks from your point of view on the trade war, because there are so many views about how this is working, and I really want to hear yours. Sure. Yeah. Well, first of all, I think so much attention is paid on the bilateral trade war between the United States and China, but in reality the U.S. is pretty much declaring the trade war everywhere, globally, and the Trump has demanded that Canada and Mexico to renegotiate the terms of NAFTA, and after putting out from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, TPP negotiations, the United States and the Trump demanded to lift up the negotiation on bilateral free trade with Japan, and through those negotiations, the U.S. is trying to get more than it could have under the TPP negotiation or the existing NAFTA agreement with its trade partners. So there's a very comprehensive campaign to renegotiate or newly negotiate a trade agreement which favors the United States, so define one of those efforts. So you know one thing that strikes me is that Trump is trying to do bilateral negotiations instead of multilateral negotiations. He's pulling out of multilateral trade negotiations, trade agreements, and going into bilateral, and I guess it's in the thought that the United States will do better that way. Unfortunately, he's given up some very important multilateral agreements like the ones with Mexico and Canada, and certainly the Pan-Pacific multilateral agreement. So the question is, and I think I know the answer of your article, is that realistic? Can he really do better by dropping out of those agreements and coming up with bilateral agreements to replace them? Or is that simply not going to work? I think as far as the trade is concerned, the Trump's approach to negotiate bilateral with individual members of the TPP grouping seems to be working, and you know when you look at the Japan-US trade negotiations, the U.S. has been very reluctant to open up the automobile sector, and one of the primary interests of Japan in entering the TPP negotiation was to kind of borrow the collective strength of all TPP members to kind of force the United States to drop the remaining automobile tariff, which is currently at 2.5% on passenger vehicles, which doesn't seem to be too high, but I mean as consumers, you know, if you look at the price of the car and 2.5% of that is actually quite significant, and for the Japanese companies that would be quite important competitive factor to get rid of this tariff. And the 2.5% is for passenger vehicles, but what's not very well known is that the U.S. categorizes the two-door SUVs, the smaller SUVs, under the light truck category, which comes with 25% tariffs, and in order to get Japan agreed to a bilateral negotiation, the Trump actually threatened Japan to raise the passenger vehicle tariff also to 25%. So with that kind of threat, the Japan was brought into, very reluctantly brought into a bilateral negotiation, whereas initial hope of Japan was that the United States would return to a multilateral TPP negotiation. Well, you know, I just wonder that, you know, whether this is sustainable in the long term, because, you know, an ex-country who is involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership sees that Trump is dropping out, sees that Trump wants to better his position by bilateral negotiations, and it may say, I mean, it depends on your bargaining position, but it may say, when are you going to do that? We're going to focus on TPP. We're going to focus on other markets, you know, have a nice day. We're not going to play with you. And I think that happens. I mean, he forces, he bullies countries into doing that. And over time, it seems to me that if he keeps on doing that, countries will find other markets. And we live in a global economic community, and there are other markets. Could Japan stand that? Or is Japan too dependent on the U.S.? Yeah. Yes, the trade is not only bilateral. So, of course, when the U.S. act in a protectionist manner, then the trade diversion can occur. And Japan is already working on signing free trade agreements or negotiating free trade agreements with other partners. As soon as the Trump pulled the U.S. out of the TPP negotiation, Japan quickly signed free trade agreement with the European Union. And also, Japan approached China and South Korea and tried to jumpstart the ASAP negotiation, regional comprehensive economic partnership, which is basically a free trade of the three North East Asian countries, Japan, Korea, China, plus the ASEAN 10 members. So, in that sense, yes, Japan is working on these three projects. One is the East Asian integration free trade. The other one is the East Asia-Europe kind of free trade. And then Japan-U.S. free trade. So, by leveraging one negotiation against another, Japan is trying to counter Trump's kind of non-compliant offensive. Yeah. I wonder, as an observer of this for a long time, you know, how you feel about a situation where Trump is first trying to bully China. And then next time you look with all these tariffs that he set up, he started this crisis, this war. The next time you look, he's doing it to Japan. And whatever you want to say is that Japan has been our closest ally by far in all of Asia. It's been our friend. It's been more than a friend ever since the war. And we have a really exclusive special relationship with Japan as we have with no other country. And here, Trump is going after Japan, too, as if we were not friends. And I wonder, you know, I mean, I think you already know how I feel about that. But I wonder how you feel about it, seeing him do that to undermine and to stress out the relationship we have had with Japan all these years. Well, I think that Trump is really pursuing realist foreign policy. And the rising security tension between China on one hand and Japan on the other is actually providing an opportunity for the US to improve its trade terms with both China and Japan. So in a sense, the US is playing the two parties separately and taking advantage of the rivalry between them. So in other words, if Japan feels a stronger growing need for security protection from the United States, Trump thinks that Japan needs to pay a higher due for the alliance. And improving the terms of trade for the United States is considered one of those the dues Japan would have to pay. That's a very chilling and uncomfortable thought, but I think you've hit on something there. The other aspect is that we have our relationship with Japan. And this stresses out that relationship. I wonder, you know, how this how the average citizen in Japan feels about this. And, you know, especially in view of Trump's recent trip to Japan, where, and this is reflected in the title of your Pacific Forum show about teeing up, Trump teeing up his game, because he did he did a lot of sports with Mr. Abe while he was there. It seems inconsistent. On the one hand, you do a lot of sports with Mr. Abe. On the other hand, you get into this bullying mode, which it just seems oxymoron to me. What are the people on the street think? Well, I think the most common understanding of the recent summit meeting was that it was a success. And that Mr. Abe successfully entertained Mr. Trump, so that Mr. Trump went home happy. And because Trump didn't mention much about trade during the visit, many people are thinking that the kind of personal relationship which you can see on the media is working to smoothen the bilateral relationship. But I'm arguing in my paper that this is temporary. And there was a lot of effort to manage the media reporting of this particular event on both sides of the Pacific. You know, sometimes you have to watch out when some people get close to you, because they don't have good intentions. That's that's what comes to mind. You may be wanting and dining with Mr. Abe, but he doesn't necessarily have good intentions. Yeah, but one of the biggest concessions Trump made is obviously not to raise the trade issues to the front line of the bilateral negotiations at this particular time, because the Japan is scheduled to go into an upper house election for the parliament in the end of July. And the ruling LDP doesn't want to have a trade dispute right before the election, and especially the pressure from the United States to open up the agriculture sector, most importantly the beef market. And so not raising these issues before the election is a favor Trump gave to Abe. And there's even greater speculation, growing speculation, that Abe is actually planning the double elections by dissolving the lower house of the parliament as well, so that the two elections will concurrently happen this summer. So this is going to be Abe's big gamble, because if Abe catches the opposition parties unprepared with dissolution of the lower house and wing some additional seats and prepare his party toward the constitutional amendment, then that's going to be Abe's dream come true. And with that kind of victory, the LDP may bend the existing rule about how in terms the Prime Minister can serve and give Abe possibly another term. So this is a big gamble for Abe if he's going to do the double elections. Yeah, right, it puts him in an interesting spot. We're going to take a short break, Sato-san. And when we come back, I would like to ask you where the G20 meeting fits in all of this and how it will affect the U.S. relationship with Japan, if at all. And then I would like to also ask you about the tripartite effect of all of this, because nothing in Asia happens in a vacuum. We'll be right back after this short break. Aloha, I'm Dennis Wong, a host here at Think Tech, Hawaii, a digital media company serving the people of Hawaii. We provide a video platform for citizen journalists to raise public awareness in Hawaii. We are a Hawaii nonprofit that depends on the generosity of its supporters to keep ongoing. We'd be grateful if you'd go to thinktechhawaii.com and make a donation to support us now. Thanks so much. Aloha, I'm Sharon Thomas Yarbrough, a host here at Think Tech, Hawaii, a digital media company serving the people of Hawaii. We provide a video platform for citizen journalists to raise public awareness in Hawaii. We are a Hawaii nonprofit that depends on the generosity of its supporters to keep on going. We'd be grateful if you'd go to thinktechhawaii.com and make a donation to support us now. Thanks so much. We're back on Global Connections with Professor Soichiro Sato, a Richard Macon Asia Pacific University, talking about an article he wrote for Pacific Forum, a dealmaker Trump teased up his game at trade war. I'll take a moment and ask why you could style it that way? Because, you know, I happen to agree that whatever Mr. Trump does is a game anyway, and there's an interesting kind of irony when you title it that way, especially after the trip where they played golf all day. Can you give me the background of the title of your article? Well, I wanted to kind of portray him as a negotiator, and he's known for that, through his TV shows and all that. And also because of the scheduled golf event, I wanted to combine that with a golf analogy. And thinking that the trade issue was kind of set aside during the meeting, but I could use the key up analogy so that, you know, we see that he has made his preparations already. It really strikes me. So anyway, going back to the G20, the G20 is in a week or two, it's coming very soon. And this is going to play into things. Isn't it between US and Japan, US and China? What do you expect will happen and how will it affect the trade war? Well, US and China are the main focus of the ongoing trade war. And if their talks don't go very well, then there will be a mutual retaliation with punitive tariffs. And that will slow down not only to economies, but the other countries trade with these two countries will also suffer. So this is a great concern in both European Union and in Japan. And they want to make sure that US and China will manage their differences and refrain from importing those extremely high tariffs against each other. And they wanted to insert this particular language against protectionism. But, you know, the name of the US protectionist is a very diplomatically difficult thing. Most likely, they will pronounce some in general support for the free trade in principle. But naming particular companies or using the word protection is very much difficult to do. So am I right to think that everybody in Japan and I guess Taiwan and South Korea would all like to see the trade war between the US and China ended because they will benefit from a secession of the hostilities? Is that what you're saying? Yes. For example, US major imports from China are electronic devices such as smartphones. And if the US raises tariffs on these products, what will happen is that the Japanese companies are exporting a lot of components to China for assembling these electronic devices. And their exports will suffer as a result of the US tariffs on the final Chinese products. So this actually relates to what I said earlier that the bilateral trade does not stop at two nations. There are multilateral implications and the Japanese companies will clearly suffer because they have relocated a lot of factories into China and the components produced in those factories end up in the US market in the form of completely finalized products. Yeah. So okay, I mean this is interesting. But let me take the other side of it for a moment. But let's assume the trade war between the United States and China goes on. Trump tends to double down on things. Whenever you think he would stop bullying somebody, he keeps on doing it. And that's a fair chance of that happening. If he doesn't get what he thinks he wants, which may change from time to time, minute to minute, then he will continue the way he has threatened Mexico and other countries. Suppose in our discussion, suppose that happens, suppose he doubles down, he ups the ante, he applies tariffs on more Chinese goods. Of course, by your discussion a moment ago, that's not good for Japan or of South Korea. And it may have a negative effect at least on those countries. What about the implications for global effect? I mean, can we say that there is a connection of all of this to the global economy? I think so. The European exports to China will also suffer. And the prolonged trade war between the US and China may actually trigger global economic downturn. But having said that, the implications to different countries are not exactly the same. And in the short term, I think China's neighbors, particularly Vietnam's manufacturing is likely to benefit from the exodus of foreign companies and their factories from China and relocation into Vietnam. We can only hope that our State Department will find good policy here, although that hasn't really been the case in the past. So this is a very complex. Reading your article, I got the message that this is very complex. There's a lot of considerations here, a lot of possibilities. Japan is in a very peculiar, if not difficult position because of all the dynamics happening around this trade war, not only directly with Japan, but also with China and others. And I guess what I'm asking you here at the end of our show is, what is your advice to Mr. Abe? How does he stay clear of a long-term problem? How does he keep the country in good economic straits? No one can afford to be involved in a trade war which you don't control and where actions by other countries involving other countries have secondary effects on you. What should Mr. Abe do to protect reserve Japan's economy? Well for Japan, the number one trade partner for the last 10 years or so has been China. The U.S. used to be Japan's number one export destination and overall trade partner, but the China has surpassed and as a result, Japan has to look at both directions, promoting trade with China and promoting trade with the United States. So this balanced approach has become essential for Japanese economic diplomacy. And Japan has to not only protect the free access into the U.S. market but the safety of its investments in China as well as in the United States and also the freedom, as much freedom for those investors to deal with their proceeds whether to reinvest or repatriate and so improving the investment environment in both U.S. and China is extremely important. The one thing Trump recently did is demand Japan to invest more into the U.S. manufacturing sector and particularly in the automobile sector, particular investment target figure has been mentioned and it's not clear if the number of companies that are mentioned as Japan's pledge to Trump is based on the agreed upon amount by individual Japanese auto companies or auto component companies or the figure just came out of the abbey in the top down manner. If the latter, the abbey is going to have a hard time forcing the domestic companies to reach the target. You know, Sato-san, it occurs to me that all this, all that we've been talking about in the last 30 minutes has the possibility of driving Japan economically away from closer relations with the U.S. or previously close relations with the U.S. and driving it essentially into the arms of China so that at the end of the day Japan's relationship is more intense, more connected with China and less with the U.S. That may not bode well for security, but for economics it sounds like an option or a possibility that may have legs. What do you think? Is there any chance of that? I think so far the security issues and economic issues are linked but they're dealt with separately. Despite the potential for the big problem in the economic sector in the trade issues, U.S. and Japan on the security front have been working very closely to cement their alliance and also elevate Japan's contributions to the security of the United States the alliance is no longer one directional in which the U.S. was protecting Japan and now Japan is contributing to the safety and security of the United States as well. So I think that trend on one hand will continue and the two companies will have to find a way to manage the economic dispute so that the economic issues will not halt the security partnership. Thank you Satosan. A wonderful discussion. I really appreciate talking with you if this goes beyond your article and I appreciate that too. Thank you so much. I hope we can get together because you know fact is these are dynamic times. Everything changes every day. There'll be much more to discuss in the future. I will be back too shortly I think. Thank you so much. Thank you.


John chapter 18. Jesus arrested. When he had finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley. On the other side, there was a garden, and he and his disciples went into it.  So Judas came to the garden, guiding at attachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns, and weapons.  Jesus of Nazareth, they replied, I am he, Jesus said. When Jesus said I am he, they drew back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, Who is it you want? Jesus of Nazareth, they said. Jesus answered, I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, then let these men go. This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled. I have not lost one of those you gave me.  This servant's name was Malchus. Jesus commanded Peter, put your sword away. Shall I not drink the cup the father has given me? Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him and brought him first to Annas. Who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year? Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jewish leaders that it would be good if one man died for the people. Peter's first denial. Simon Peter and another disciple were following Jesus because this disciple was known to the high priest. He went with Jesus into the high priest's courtyard, but Peter had to wait outside at the door. The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the servant girl on duty there and brought Peter in. You earned one of this man's disciples too, are you? She asked Peter. He replied, I am not. It was cold and the servants and officials stood around a fire. They had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself. The high priest questions Jesus. Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching. I have spoken openly to the world, Jesus replied. I always taught in synagogues or at the temple where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said. When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. Is this the way you answer the high priest, he demanded? If I said something wrong, Jesus replied, testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke truth, why did you strike me? Then Anas sent him bound to Caiaphas, the high priest. Peter's second and third denials. Meanwhile, Simon Peter was still standing there, warming himself. So they asked him, you aren't one of his disciples too, are you? He denied it, saying, I am not. One of the high priest's servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him. Didn't I see you with him in the garden? Again, Peter denied it. And at that moment, a rooster began to crow. Jesus before Pilate. Then the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now, it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanliness, they did not enter the palace because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. So Pilate came out to them and asked, what charges are you bringing against this man? If you were not a criminal, they replied, we would not have handed them all over to you. Pilate said, take him yourselves and judge him by your own law. But we have no right to execute anyone, the objected. This took place to fulfill what Jesus had said about the kind of death he was going to die. Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, are you the king of the Jews? Is that your own idea, Jesus asked? Or did others talk to you about me? Am I a Jew? Pilate replied, your own people and chief priests handed you over to me. What is it you have done? Jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.  Jesus answered, you say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me. What is truth? retorted Pilate. With this he went out again to the Jews, gathered there and said, I find no basis for a charge against him. But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release the king of the Jews? They shouted it back. No, not him. Give us Barabbas. Now Barabbas had taken part in an uprising.


The Long Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. A presentation of the Long Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Long Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Long Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce Mr. William Bradford Huey, noted author and analyst and editor-in-chief of the Long Jean Chronoscope, and Mr. Carl Hess, press editor of Newsweek Magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Harold Valde, United States congressman from Illinois, and chairman of the Un-American Activities Committee. Mr. Valde, it's a pleasure to welcome you to the Chronoscope again, and our viewers of course know you as chairman of the rather highly controversial House Un-American Activities Committee, and tonight we'd like for you to tell us something about your plans for 1953. What will be your first area of investigation? Well, Mr. Huey and Mr. Hess, I want to assure you first of all that it is a great pleasure to be on your very fine program again. As to the first area of investigation, I believe, and I think the rest of the members of the committee concur with me in this, then our first duty is to weed out the communists and fellow travelers and pinkos, as they are properly known, from the executive branch of government. Any particular part now? Well, primarily the State Department and the Department of Defense, and of course after we are able to do that, I think the next important thing is to act as a watchdog committee to see that no commies or other subversives of any kind infiltrate the new Eisenhower administration. The first thing, I suppose, is that you're aimed at the holdovers, the people who were in the previous administration who haven't yet been discharged from government. Yes, naturally, Mr. Huey, it's going to take quite a long while to change over the control of the executive department of government. It's going to be a gradual process. Now, sir, you mentioned that you've been investigating the State Department, I think, is fairly well known, but you mentioned the Defense Department now. Are you directing a major investigating effort at the Defense Department now? At the present time, there is one subpoena out for a very important witness in the Department of Defense, and of course it's impossible for me to say anything more about that at this time. But we do expect to show that several of the people in the last administration were very close to being communists and very close to the Soviet government. Do you feel that any of them had a part in influence and policy? Oh, certainly I do, and I believe that we will be able to prove that eventually. Important policy in the Defense Department? Yes, I think important policy in the Defense Department. And you think these people had access to secret information in the Defense Department? I do believe that is true. We have had, of course, in the past investigations into the Defense Department. We've had investigations in the Signal Corps Intelligence Department, and we've had other investigations. Well, of course, as you perhaps remember, we had General Walter Beedle-Smith, the head of the CIA, who in Philadelphia said that he could give us some testimony in the executive session that is a closed session that he couldn't possibly give us in the open session, who we were having at that time. So we have had some investigations into the Defense Department, which leads us to believe that while it isn't extremely serious, it's something that we have to give our attention to and weed it out before it goes any further. Do you anticipate taking up, for example, the remark that even the CIA has been infiltrated? Oh, certainly. By the CIA, you mean the Central Intelligence Agency? Yes, that's right. Now, sir, you say that you want to protect the new Eisenhower administration from subversives. Do you expect to get a higher degree of cooperation from the Eisenhower administration than you got from the Truman administration? Certainly, but when I say that to protect the Eisenhower administration, I don't mean that in a political way. I think the protection of the Eisenhower administration will certainly be a protection of the American people. But actually, we do expect to, as we in Congress, in the legislative branch, do expect to get a lot more cooperation from the executive branch of government than we had in the past. Specifically, on the matter of our members, our viewers will remember that President Truman repeatedly refused to turn over to you certain executive files. Now, do you think that President Eisenhower will make those executive files available to you? Yes, but understand, I don't believe that President Eisenhower, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover, Mr. Brownell, or any of the cabinet heads should give all of their information to the legislative branch. There is certain... Well, all that you'd ask for... Well, I personally would not ask for anything that I didn't think they could give. What I'm referring to is the loyalty files of the various departments in the executive branch. I believe that they should have access to those. Now, the committee itself, of course, has had a, as I say, a very controversial career from the days that Martin Dias was its first chairman. Now, do you feel that the committee today has a degree of public support that it's never had? Yes, I do, from all of the letters that come into our committee and they come in at the rate of about a thousand a day. We have, by far, a great majority, and I would just guess about 90% of them are favorable to the work that the Un-American Activities Committee has been doing. What problem do you still have in public acceptance of the work, if any problems? Well, there are always a lot of people who will never accept any program that we undertake because it might affect them in the future. We have a lot of black wingers, a lot of fellow travelers, a lot of pinkos will object to anything we do, regardless of what it is. What about money? Does your committee spend more money than any other committee in Congress? Yes, we do. While it is the smallest committee in membership, we only have nine members on the Un-American Activities Committee. We have a staff that numbers into the fifties and our appropriation, which we're going to ask for this year, is 300,000. That's more than last year, isn't it? Yes, it's just $15,000 more than we used last year. However, the other committees of Congress do not have the same problem as presented to us. They didn't keep extensive files as we keep. And I want to say here and now that all of our files are open to inspection by the various intelligence agencies of the executive branch. Do you maintain liaison with them? Certainly we do, and we intend to continue maintaining liaison with them, in other words cooperating with them. In addition to your investigation of the Defense Department, I believe that it's the most controversial thing you are about to do. There's some investigation of subversive leds, subversive activities in the colleges. Do you expect to get around to the educational system this year? Yes, some of the first witnesses we will call will be professors and people who are interested in education. I want to say that by and large we have had the cooperation of a great number of universities and colleges throughout the country. They want to know whether there's any subversive influences operating in their individual colleges and universities. But what about the objection to the loyalty of the universities? Well, there is a considerable objection to loyalty oaths that's brought about largely by the American Association of University Professors, I believe, which is a very close organization. They may have some reason to object to loyalty oaths. But I believe that when we have completed our investigation and have our hearings, and I'm very firm in this, that they allow the people who have had objection to signing the loyalty oath will no longer have that objection. Well, are these loyalty oaths workable, efficient? What exactly do they achieve in the university? Well, certainly when a person signs a loyalty oath, which is somewhat similar to a non-communist affidavit under the Tant Hartley Act law, he's going to think twice before he signs that oath for fear of being prosecuted for perjury before he signs it. Now, so you were with the FBI, I believe, before you went to Congress? Yes, I was with the FBI. Didn't you specialize in sabotage? Well, mostly in espionage activities, Soviet espionage activities. Do you feel that there is more or less communist activity in the United States today? Is it growing or is it becoming less? I believe the actual communist activity has become less in the past several years than it has been since 1932. Then quality or quantity? Well, that's in quantity and possibly not in quantity, there's still a very real immediate danger of the infiltration of communist party members, of course, who are controlled by the Soviet in our various fields for institutions. Well, on your investigation of education, do you feel that you will have the cooperation of most of the educational institutions or do you think that teachers' organizations will resist your investigation? Beyond the one you've mentioned? Well, certainly I think that we will have the cooperation of the great majority of our educational institutions. I want to say, first of all, that we're not concentrating on any one individual institution except those direct communist schools. For instance, the Lincoln schools, the California Labor School, the Jefferson School, all those schools which largely teach labor and communism directly and under direct influence of the communist party. And as a final question, sir, you don't feel that you are going to violate civil rights in this investigation? Well, there is a possibility that we might, in some cases, at least it might be made to appear that we are violating civil rights, especially it will be made to appear that way by the communists themselves. Well, thank you very much for being with us this evening, sir. It's been a pleasure, I'm sure. The opinions that you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the launching chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Carl Hess. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Harold Velde, United States Congressman from Illinois and Chairman of the Un-American Activities Committee. How would you go about hiring a man for an important job? Well, in a man or in a watch, the record of past performance is the only yardstick to real value. That's why so many sensible people own Long Jean watches. The honors which Long Jean watches have won are a record of past performance. These World's Fair Grand Prizes and Gold Medals, each a highest award, were bestowed by many men in many lands at many times. Observatory accuracy awards won just yesterday, so to speak, are also part of the Long Jean record. From the record, there could be no doubt that Long Jean watches are above and beyond the ordinary. For almost a hundred years, Long Jean has been shown to be close to the finest watch in all the world, by every standard, beauty, integrity of manufacture, accuracy, and reliability of performance. The Long Jean record made Long Jean the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift. Long Jean, premier product of the Long Jean Wittner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at this same time for the Long Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important dishes of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Long Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Long Jean. This is Frank Knight, reminding you that Long Jean and Wittner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem, agency for Long Jean Wittner watches. History repeated and you are there, Sundays on the CBS television network.


Hi, this is Dr. Don. I have a problem out of Chapter 8, Section 8.3 on dependent samples, which are also known as paired samples. I have another video on this same problem using StatCrunch. This one, I want to show you how to use the Excel calculator I have on my website. In this problem, a company wants to know whether or not its consumer product ratings have changed from year to year. They give us a table of data. They say, Alpha is 0.05, and they ask, is there enough evidence to conclude the ratings have changed? Okay, that language have changed tells me that the claim is that they have changed, which is a non-equal operator, which means that the claim must be the alternative, and we have a two-tail test. Meaning down here, the claim is, as I said, ratings have changed, and looking, we see that the correct statement of the two hypotheses, the null is the mean difference, mean before or last year minus mean this year is 0, and the claim is that the mean difference is not equal to 0. We need to find a critical value. We need to find the D-bar, the mean of the differences, S of D, the standard deviation, and the standard eye test statistic, and of course, make a decision and a conclusion. We're going to use the Excel calculators I have on my website. We'll go there now. This is my website, drdonright.com. When you get to the website, just click on Business 233. It will bring up a page and list a number of calculators I have there. We want the paired sample t-test, and we'll bring up that calculator and let it load. Now, I'm going to scroll down here a bit. I actually have two calculators, one for the summary data, which is what came up. We want the raw data in this case, and I have to admit this part is not as easy as I'd like it, but you have to do actually is to key in the data. This is the before, six, enter, eight, enter, five for the before, and the after is three, enter, eight, enter, three. That's not too bad with that group of data. I'm going to scroll back over here, and as quickly as that, just entering the data, we need to put in the alpha level, which is this one is 0.05, and the difference in this case is zero. We just want to know if there's a change. We need to select the alternative or the claim operator, which is not equal, and it tells us the claim as the alternative. It gives us the statement of the hypotheses, tells us the two-tailed tests, gives us the degrees of freedom, the critical values, plus and minus 2.365, and the rejection regions. We get the test statistic, which is D bar, use of D, 0.625, and the standardized test statistic, which is 1.106. We get the p-value, which is 0.3, which is greater than 0.05, which tells us we do not reject, but down here it gives us the decision, we fail to reject, and the conclusion is at the 5% level, there is not enough evidence support to claim. I might also mention that this calculator will give you the confidence interval for the test statistic. Hope this helps.


Have you ever heard the expression they had chemistry?  Not in the sense of a romantic Bunsen burner lit dinner, but because of the involvement of certain biological scents.  In this video, you'll find out why. It's been known for a long time that animals release chemical hormones called pheromones that are involved in sexual attraction. The mechanism and reasons for this attraction in humans were a mystery. That is, until 1995, when a study looked at how a man's genes, that's DNA by the way, not blue genes, could be detected by women through their sense of smell. The study focused on one gene in particular, the MHC gene, which instructs a type of immune response in the body. The scientists set out to test heterosexual women's sensitivity to male odors. The study involved volunteers, 49 women and 44 men, all of whom were selected for their variety of MHC gene types. Men were given clean t-shirts to wear for two nights and then returned to the scientists. The researchers put each t-shirt in a box equipped with a smelling hole and invited the women volunteers to come and sniff the boxes. The women had to sample the odour of seven boxes and describe it. They were asked to give each box scores for intensity, pleasantness and sexiness. Almost like speed dating for t-shirts. The results were impressive. Women preferred the sense of t-shirts worn by men with MHC genes different from their own. This all proves and brings new meaning to the term opposite to tract. It seems that we are more attracted to people who are genetically different to ourselves. This is very useful to species as more diversity in the genetics of the population increases its chance of survival and resistance to change. However, please don't give up on washing. Please like and share our videos with your friends. If you have any questions that you want help with, just comment below.


So the sedimentary structures in deltas vary from the delta plane to the delta slope to the pro-delta. And I'm going to talk in this video about different processes that transport the sediment from the mouth of the river to the deeper water and how that affects the accumulation of sediment and how we see that in the rock record. So I'm going to start off with delta where the water, the lake water, or the ocean has very few storms and very few tides. So this is going to be a river-dominated delta, which means that the fluvial processes are the ones that are predominantly shaping the characteristics of the delta. So I've started with a profile and a bunch of sedimentary structures that we're going to be talking about. On the delta plane, the facies are mostly the fluvial facies, and particularly meandering river facies. So we often have sandstones that are deposited by the migration of those channels with erosional surfaces at the bottom with planar lamination trough cross stratification ripples as the point bars migrate with the channel. Between those deposits, we can have a flood plain deposits or lake deposits, and those reflect the delta plane facies as well as meandering river facies. So when the river reaches the lake or the ocean here, the flow speed decreases very, very quickly, and you deposit a lot of sediment very fast. That typically produces climbing ripples. Those are ripples where there's very little erosion on the upstream side, and instead you're accumulating sediment very quickly. So if there aren't storms or tides transporting the sediment elsewhere, you end up accumulating a wedge of sediment schematically shown here right at the river mouth. So the sediment, the slope there gets steeper and steeper, never as steep as I've shown it here, but it gets steep enough that you end up with a slope failure. And that triggers a turbidity current which produces a turbidite in terms of deposits. So if you just have sediment being deposited here, you end up triggering turbidity flows, and those will flow down the slope, depositing some sand on the slope depending on how steep it is and how fast the flow is. And they will extend out into the pro-delta area here. So what you see in this particular case, I drew a stratigraphic column in here, is you'd accumulate mud between flows, then you'd have a turbidite, and then you'd accumulate mud again. And so this lower part would be massive, and then you'd have the upper planar lamination, so the massive part is the Bulma A sequence, the planar lamination's Bulma B. And then you'd get the current ripples, and then the faint lamination at the top, and go back to your deposition here. So this would be in an area where you accumulate a fair amount of sand, but you're not eroding away all the shale. If you came out here, what you would see in the pro-delta is maybe just a little bit of sand or maybe between shale, maybe you'd have some of these finding upward normally graded beds, maybe occasionally a ripple. So when the only way sediment is transported from the river mouth to the basin is by the salt failure, you end up with turbidites. Some parts of the ocean have a significant number of waves, which helps transport the sediment brought in to rivers, to other places on the shoreline, or into deeper water. And some large lakes also have waves that redistribute that sediment, and that process of redistributing the sediment creates distinctive sedimentary structures that record that influence of waves. And so one of the things that happens is in the zone near shore, the waves create beaches, and so you get the climbing ripples right at the mouth of the river, but those can be reworked into a planar lamination that dip towards the ocean that represent the beach deposits. Almost always when you have waves, you see evidence of beaches from that activity and that transport of sand along the shore. So the waves will also produce wave ripples and transport the sand down to these depths. So in here, you end up with wave ripples, and with storm wave base, out at this zone you end up with typical storm deposits, where you're accumulating mud between storms, you have erosion at peak storm, deposition of the storm deposits, so this can have some conglomerate in it, and hammocky cross stratification is really common, and you can get some of the wave ripples at the top. So between storm wave base and normal wave base, you typically get these deposits, and then out in the deep basin, normally accumulating mudstone, but sometimes you get these little finding upward beds that represent storm deposits that get all the way out to this zone here. So the main difference between a river dominated delta and a river influenced delta is that the storm deposits are common offshore instead of turbidites, and you have a lot more wave ripples in the shallower environments. There are deltas that have both storms and turbidites in them, and so there are end members of the two of them. Tides can be a very important process, transporting sediment from rivers offshore and along the shoreline as well. In the case of tide influenced deltas, the river mouth and that junction between the river mouth and the ocean has very high tidal flows. So in this particular zone, depending on the flow of the tide, there's a lot of sedimentary characteristics typical of tides. So for example, herringbone cross stratification is one of those where you have deposition in one direction during the tide coming in and going the other way as the tide goes out. Mud drapes, reactivation surfaces are also common. A lot of times these, on the delta top, these tidal currents are within channels, so they can end up looking quite a bit like the meandering river facies. And as you go further inland, it is dominated by the meandering river facies, and as you get closer and closer to the edge of the delta, you get more and more of these tidal influences. So sometimes you can see their places in between those two where you can see the fluvial deposits, but occasionally you might see a ripple migrating, or ripple cross lamination showing flow in the upstream direction. So as you go offshore, you still have those strong tidal currents, and so you end up with the herringbone ripple and cross stratification going further offshore. When you go far enough out here, it's mostly mud, and so you typically get tidal influences to the depth where the tidal currents interact with the bottom. Sediments still need to be transported farther offshore, and so sometimes out here you'll see a few sand beds in the mud, maybe from a lot of tidal erosion, but it's pretty common to also get turbidites below the zone where you have a lot of the tidal transport, because the sediment will accumulate above this zone here, and the slopes can be steep enough to produce the turbidites as well, and the tide influence delta. You know that to identify that tides are important, you look for the very distinctive sedimentary structures that indicate tides, like the herringbone cross stratification, the reactivation surfaces, and the mud drapes. Thanks for watching.