Now I shall discuss those qualities which are of specific significance for the ability to love. According to what I said about the nature of love, the main condition for the achievement of love is the overcoming of one's narcissism. The narcissistic orientation is one in which one experiences as real only that which exists within oneself while the phenomena in the outside world have no reality in themselves but are experienced only from the viewpoint of their being useful or dangerous to one. The opposite pole to narcissism is objectivity. It is the faculty to see people and things as they are objectively and to be able to separate this objective picture from a picture which is formed by one's desires and fears. All forms of psychosis show the inability to be objective to an extreme degree. For the insane person, the only reality that exists is that within him, that of his fears and desires. He sees the world outside as symbols of his inner world, as his creation. All of us do the same when we dream. In the dream we produce and we stage dramas which are the expression of our wishes and fears although sometimes also of our insights and judgment. And while we are asleep, we are convinced that the product of our dreams is as real as the reality which we perceive in our waking state. All of us have an unobjective view of the world, one which is distorted by our narcissistic orientation. A woman for instance calls up the doctor saying she wants to come to his office that same afternoon. The doctor answers that he is not free this same afternoon, but that he can see her the next day. Her answer is, but doctor, I live only five minutes from your office. She cannot understand his explanation that it does not save him time that for her the distance is so short. She experiences the situation narcissistically. Since she saves time, he saves time. The only reality to her is she herself. How many parents experience the child's reactions in terms of his being obedient, of giving them pleasure, of being a credit to them and so forth, instead of perceiving or even being interested in what the child feels for and by himself? How many husbands have a picture of their wives as being domineering because their own attachment to mother makes them interpret any demand as a restriction of their freedom?  The lack of objectivity as far as foreign nations are concerned is notorious. From one day to another, another nation is made out to be utterly depraved and fiendish while one's own nation stands for everything that is good and noble. Every action of the enemy is judged by one standard, every action of oneself by another. Even good deeds by the enemy are considered a sign of particular devilishness and to deceive us and the world while our bad deeds are necessary and justified by our noble goals which they serve. The faculty to think objectively is reason. The emotional attitude behind reason is that of humility. To be objective, to use one's reason, is possible only if one has achieved an attitude of humility if one has emerged from the dreams of omniscience and omnipotence which one has as a child. If I want to learn the art of loving, I must strive for the objectivity in every situation and become sensitive to the situations where I am not objective. I must try to see the difference between my picture of a person and his behavior as it is narcissistically distorted and the person's reality that exists regardless of my interests, needs and fears. To have acquired the capacity for objectivity and reason is half the road to achieving the art of loving but it must be acquired with regard to everybody with whom one comes in contact. If someone would want to reserve his objectivity for the loved person and think he can dispense with it in his relationship to the rest of the world he will soon discover that he fails both here and there. The ability to love depends on one's capacity to emerge from narcissism and from the incestuous fixation to mother and clan. It depends on our capacity to grow, to develop a productive orientation in our relationship toward the world and ourselves. This process of emergence, of birth, of waking up requires one quality as a necessary condition—faith. The practice of the art of loving requires the practice of faith. What is faith? Even to begin to understand the problem of faith one must differentiate between rational and irrational faith. By irrational faith I understand the belief which is based on one's submission to irrational authority. In contrast, rational faith is a conviction which is rooted in one's own experience of thought or feeling. Rational faith is not primarily belief in something but the quality of certainty and firmness which our convictions have. The process of creative thinking in any field of human endeavor often starts with what may be called a rational vision, itself a result of considerable previous study, reflective thinking and observation. When the scientist succeeds in gathering enough data and working out a mathematical formulation to make his original vision highly plausible, he may be said to have arrived at a tentative hypothesis. A careful analysis of the hypothesis in order to discern its implications and the amassing of data which support it lead to a more adequate hypothesis and eventually perhaps to its inclusion in a wide-ranging theory. At every step from the conception of a rational vision to the formulation of a theory, faith is necessary. Faith in the vision as a rationally valid aim to pursue, faith in the hypothesis as a likely implausible proposition and faith in the final theory, at least until a general consensus about its validity has been reached. This faith is rooted in one's own experience, in the confidence in one's power of thought, observation and judgment. While irrational faith is the acceptance of something as true only because an authority or the majority say so, rational faith is rooted in an independent conviction based upon one's own productive observing and thinking in spite of the majority's opinion. In the sphere of human relations, faith is an indispensable quality of any significant friendship or love. Having faith in another person means to be certain of the reliability and unchangeability of his fundamental attitudes, of the core of his personality, of his love. By this, I do not mean that a person may not change his opinions, but that his basic motivations remain the same. That, for instance, his respect for life and human dignity is part of himself, not subject to change. In the same sense, we have faith in ourselves. We are aware of the existence of a self, of a core in our personality which is unchangeable and which persists throughout our life in spite of varying circumstances and regardless of certain changes in opinions and feelings. It is this core which is the reality behind the word I and on which our conviction of our own identity is based. Unless we have faith in the persistence of our self, our feeling of identity is threatened and we become dependent on other people whose approval then becomes the basis for our feeling of identity. Only the person who has faith in himself is able to be faithful to others because only he can be sure that he will be the same at a future time as he is today and therefore that he will feel and act as he now expects to. Another meaning of having faith in a person refers to the faith we have in the potentialities of others. The most rudimentary form in which this faith exists is the faith which the mother has toward her newborn baby. That it will live, grow, walk, and talk. However, the development of the child in this respect occurs with such regularity that the expectation of it does not seem to require faith. It is different with those potentialities which can fail to develop. The child's potentiality is to love, to be happy, to use his reason and more specific potentialities like artistic gifts. They are the seeds which grow and become manifest if the proper conditions for their development are given and they can be stifled if these are absent. One of the most important of these conditions is that the significant person in a child's life have faith in these potentialities. The faith in others has its culmination in faith in mankind. Like the faith in the child, it is based on the idea that the potentialities of man are such that given the proper conditions, he will be capable of building a social order governed by the principles of equality, justice, and love. Man has not yet achieved the building of such an order and therefore the conviction that he can do so requires faith. But like all rational faith, this too is not wishful thinking, but based upon the evidence of the past achievements of the human race and on the inner experience of each individual, on his own experience of reason and love. The basis of rational faith is productiveness. To live by our faith means to live productively. It follows that the belief in power in the sense of domination and the use of power are the reverse of faith. There is no rational faith in power. There is submission to it or, on the other part of those who have it, the wish to keep it. While to many power seems to be the most real of all things, the history of man has proved it to be the most unstable of all human achievements. Because of the fact that faith and power are mutually exclusive, all religions and political systems which originally are built on rational faith become corrupt and eventually lose what strength they have if they rely on power or ally themselves with it. To have faith requires courage, the ability to take a risk, the readiness even to accept pain and disappointment. Whoever insists on safety and security as primary conditions of life cannot have faith. To be loved and to love need courage. The courage to judge certain values as of ultimate concern and to take the jump and stake everything on these values. Is there anything to be practiced about faith and courage? Indeed, faith can be practiced at every moment. It takes faith to bring up a child. It takes faith to fall asleep. It takes faith to begin any work. But we all are accustomed to having this kind of faith. To stick to one's judgment about a person even if public opinion or some unforeseen facts seem to invalidate it. To stick to one's convictions even though they are unpopular. All this requires faith and courage. To take the difficulties, setbacks and sorrows of life as a challenge which to overcome makes us stronger rather than as unjust punishment which should not happen to us requires faith and courage. The practice of faith and courage begins with the small details of daily life. The first step is to notice where and when one loses faith. To look through the rationalizations which are used to cover up this loss of faith. To recognize where one acts in a cowardly way and again how one rationalizes it. To recognize how every betrayal of faith weakens one and how increased weakness leads to new betrayal and so on in a vicious circle. Then one will also recognize that while one is consciously afraid of not being loved the real though usually unconscious fear is that of loving. To love means to commit oneself without guarantee to give oneself completely in the hope that our love will produce a love in the loved person. Love is an act of faith and whoever is of little faith is also of little love. One attitude is basic for the practice of love. Activity. I have said before that by activity is not meant doing something but an interactivity, the productive use of one's powers. Love is an activity. If I love I am in a constant state of active concern with the loved person but not only with him or her for I shall become incapable of relating myself actively to the loved person if I am lazy, if I am not in a constant state of awareness, alertness, activity. Sleep is the only proper situation for inactivity. The state of awakeness is one in which laziness should have no place. The paradoxical situation with a vast number of people today is that they are half asleep when awake and half awake when asleep or when they want to sleep. To be fully awake is the condition for not being bored or being boring and indeed not to be bored or boring is one of the main conditions for loving. To be active in thought, feelings with one's eyes and ears throughout the day to avoid inner laziness, be it in the form of being receptive, hoarding or plain wasting one's time is an indispensable condition for the practice of the art of loving. The capacity to love demands a state of intensity, awakeness, enhanced vitality which can only be the result of a productive and active orientation in many other spheres of life. If one is not productive in other spheres, one is not productive in love either.


Thank you very much. Thank you all very much and good afternoon and I thank you all so for honoring us with your visit here today. Some of you have just told me before I came in here that you were praying for me and I want you to know that I think I'm very much aware of that. I have a feeling I'm getting help almost all the time I'm here and and that's where it's coming from. I want you to know in the short time we're together how grateful we are for the good and important work that you are doing and believe me if I could assign times by how important to meetings are yours would be a lot longer than it's going to be it should be the longest many of those that I have to have could be a lot shorter but I can't express strongly enough that what you're doing is important is necessary and is right and as long as I'm president you and others who stand up for our Judeo-Christian traditions and values will be welcome here because you belong here. Now of course if you could help register a few million voters and I understand you're doing exactly that then maybe you could send a message of thunder from the grassroots that no one in Washington could ignore. I know that some people in this town seem to delight in pretending that you don't exist but please listen to me when I say you are not alone. In fact maybe it's maybe it's time we we let them in on a little secret. We have the majority of the American people and together and met together we should make it clear that America's where America's heart is because that's where power lies real power no matter where I go no greater truth shines through than the one you seek to live by each day. Preserving America must begin with faith in the God who has blessed this land. We we don't have the answers he has the answers and the sooner we can accept that simple fact the wiser and better off will all be. Isaiah reminded us that the Lord opens his gates and keeps in peace a nation that trusts in him and you are trying to restore to their place of honor those bedrock values handed down by families and churches to serve a society's compass. Our time tested values have never failed us when we've had the courage to live up to them and I think you're beginning to succeed. I think we're seeing signs that America is stronger economically and yes stronger spiritually too and maybe that's why we're stronger economically. By the end of the 1970s millions of American families had seen the golden promise of the American dream destroyed by runaway inflation taxes and interest rates. The rate of price increases is down to three point six percent in the last three months but I'm not going to be satisfied until it's zero. We passed a tax rate reduction that's helped parents by reducing by over $900 a year the tax bill that would have been owed by the typical American family but I want you to know that greater tax fairness for families and greater tax incentives for families will be key considerations in the proposal that are being developed to simplify our tax system. I know that rendering under Caesar what is Caesar should not be virtually impossible without legal help. I believe there has been and continues to be a great hunger in America for a moral and spiritual revival. George Gallup Jr. has noticed a strong and welcome trend in his surveys a burgeoning of interest in religion a searching he says for spiritual moorings a desire for a deeper understanding of one's faith. Well we've been seeing signs that family life is making a comeback we're remembering that with freedom comes personal and parental responsibility and we're remembering that it's not enough to wish others well by supporting a more benevolent government. Tolerance kindness and love begin at home in our own lives in our own families and in our own communities and I think all this is beginning to have a profound impact on us as a people and the character of our nation and on the destiny of America.  We're making progress but all that we've done is only a fraction of what needs to be done. How can we rest? How can we be satisfied knowing that the God who's blessed our land has been expelled from our children's schoolrooms? We cannot and we will not. If enough of us pray together, stand together and work together then the gates of resistance will fall and we'll see the day when freedom of voluntary vocal prayer has been restored to every classroom in America. Who knows if we get God and discipline back in our schools maybe we can get drugs and violence out. Neither can we rest nor can the conscience of America be at peace when the lives of over 4,000 unborn children are being snuffed out every day and I have a feeling that someone else has been talking to you on this subject already. 4,000 children who will never laugh, sing, never know the joy of human love, will never strive to heal the sick, feed the poor or make peace among nations. So let us go forth with peaceful but renewed determination knowing that no challenge is more important than restoring the right to life for without that right no other rights have any meaning at all. I've been accused of oversimplifying things but on this particular subject I wonder if we haven't overlooked a kind of simple answer that the Constitution already provides this elimination of this manner of killing. There were great hearings before the Congress, before committees, just a couple of years ago on the matter of abortion and when does life begin and at the end of all the testimony by all the edict experts from every side that could be interested in this including the medical. There was not one shred of evidence introduced that the unborn were not truly living human beings and until and unless someone can establish without a doubt that they are not alive then the Constitution of this country protects their life, their liberty and their pursuit of life. As Joe Lewis said on that unforgettable night in a patriotic rally at Madison Square Garden during World War II the world champion then a buck private at $54 a month walked out on the stage there'd been a lot of talk about our relationship with God during that war time meeting but he was the first and only one that put it this way. We'll win because we're on God's side. Everybody put it the other way around. Well within our families and communities let's continue to reach out to strive for a spirit of friendship and fellowship among people and nations and among all who share our lives and our dreams for a better world and let us remember that the blessings of liberty we enjoy do not belong to us alone they are gifts of God to men and women everywhere and we have a duty to support all who struggle for freedom. I just think you would be interested in one little bulletin not too long ago I went out to Colorado Springs and addressed the graduating class of the Air Force Academy all those cadets 993 of them the biggest graduating class in our history and I stood and shook 993 hands but what warmed my heart even though it surprised me somewhat was the great percentage of them that in the few seconds we had as we were shaking hands went out of their way to tell me something about their belief in God in prayer and their dedication to religion these are going to be the officers in our Air Force and are already now since their graduation young men and women of our country I was overwhelmed and later I mentioned it the commanding general and he said every morning at 6 30 there are two religious services every morning and he says every morning there are anywhere from 600 to 800 cadets in their worshiping. I thank you for what you're doing and thank you for your faith and I really only told you that last little incident there so because everybody needs to know that when they're being successful and you are being successful thank you for the victory of principles and ideals I know you will win and that all Americans will share God bless you all


Question is from Maxibon Jr. Do macros really matter? Absolutely. Not at all. They definitely matter. It's important to know what is in your food, know what, so macronutrients are proteins, fats, and carbs. And those three macronutrients, macro meaning big, because then you have micronutrients, which are things like your vitamins and your phytonutrients and stuff like that. But each macronutrient has a specific function in the body, and two of them are essential. Okay, what that means is the two essential macronutrients are proteins and fats. And if you don't eat enough of either one of those, you'll have some pretty bad health consequences leading up to eventual death. Possibly. I mean, you could go so far as to cause your body to break down. So two of those are essential. So you, at the very minimum, want to know what your minimum intake or requirements are for both proteins and fats. Well, and how often did you guys, especially later in our career, when in this probably you, you probably became more aware of this, but how often did you assess a diet and go like, oh, wow, this is probably why you feel this way. Your fats are extremely low. Right. Or you're not getting enough protein. Well, no wonder we're not building any muscle. Totally. And so this is where macros really do matter. Now, it's funny because it's actually, I was actually just thinking about doing a post around this. This is great that we're going in this direction. If all you cared about was losing 10 pounds on the scale, just 10 pounds on the scale, then it doesn't matter as much. The thing that matters the most is calorie restriction. It's going from X amount of calories, reducing that by 500 to 1,000 calories every single day or creating more calorie expenditure and you will lose weight. Now the problem with that and what I would see a lot with people that did this, and this is common when you get clients that switch from eating bad food and by bad, I mean fast food and tons of sugar and processed foods and then also they go to salads and chicken breast and eating like super low calorie and then running on the treadmill and then they lose 10 pounds. But then we test their body fat when they start and then we test their body fat again after they've lost this 10 pounds and you know what happens a lot of the time? They get fatter. As a percentage.  How's that possible? They lost 10 pounds. How could you get fatty? Like how did the pause like that? I was like, I was trying to wait for it. It's fat, boom. Well, I mean how many people, I mean at least for me, this was common. Did you see that that just demoralized them? How many clients, I mean I used to have clients where we would do like the hydrostatic way or body fat test and even though I was telling them to follow something, they were still kind of doing their own thing. Going, doing more cardio, pushing harder, restricting calories, they turned it into a game. Can I work harder? Can I restrict even more than what Adam's saying?  Well, how is that possible? How is that possible?  And you don't even need to do that. All it has to be is one more pound over it.  That's right, because it's the percentage, right?  So that's a very good point. The other thing you wanna pay attention to is this, is besides the minimum requirements of the essential macronutrients, proteins and fats, there's also optimal amounts of especially proteins. Studies are pretty conclusive on this. If you wanna maximize the muscle building effects of protein when you combine it with resistance training, you wanna eat roughly 0.6 to one gram of protein per pound of body weight if you're a relatively lean individual. If you're really overweight, then you wanna use your lean body mass.  Now you have your lean body mass. Studies show this pretty consistently. Eating within this range means you're gonna build more muscle, which means, you know, indirectly you'll have a faster metabolism and you'll typically get better results. Protein is also more satiating.  Now part of this is because protein itself is satiating. The other part of it is because oftentimes in a person's diet, protein is where they get their whole natural foods. If you look at the average person's diet and you were to just categorize their food in two categories, heavily processed and unprocessed. Most of the proteins would be the unprocessed foods. In fact, that might be the only things that they eat that are unprocessed. And unprocessed foods tend to also be quite satiating. But you know, there's this thing about macros and calories. It's that, you know, they're important things to understand. You just don't wanna get stuck obsessing about them all the time. But that doesn't mean you ignore them. You wanna learn about them first. Yeah, I mean, like definitely calories are your first priority in terms of being able to make sure that you're under a certain amount if my goal is to lose weight. But to bring it back to your satiating point, that was a big one for me to be able to relay to my clients in terms of being able to satiate yourself. So that way you're not still eating calories and it makes it easier the process of being able to delay the hunger onset. And so for me to eat like that was always like a better strategy than to try and just like minimize the amount of calories and keep that like same balance of carbohydrates that I had before. Right, a 2000 calorie diet where the macros are not ideal means you're gonna feel worse. You're gonna have less energy, less strength, hungrier, maybe even worse mood. Versus a 2000 calories diet where the macros are ideal for your body, you're gonna feel much better. Now it's more complicated than that but those are the two big rocks that you gotta tackle first. It's calories and macros. Understand them and learn them. Then you can kind of move into a diet that's a little more relaxed. We'd have to look at those things so much. It's funny that the bodybuilding community gets a really bad rap for this but I actually really liked the way a lot of them do this and many bodybuilders don't even pay attention to calories. They only manage macros.  Right, and that's all they focus on. They're not really worried if it's 20 or 30 calories north or south. That's less important to them as it is making sure that, okay, if I started off this muscle building program and I was allowing myself 300 grams of carbs, 120 grams of fat and 200 grams of protein, that's my starting point. And if I'm trying to build, I use typically carbohydrates or fats to increase those calories and you can interchange those if you want. If I'm trying to cut or reduce, I reduce from carbohydrates or fat and I can interchange those. And as long as I'm staying in a healthy range for my fat, I'm pretty good. And I think that learning to manage the diet that way, although it's a little more challenging for people, I think the lessons that you get from that that will carry over into long-term intuitive eating if you can eventually get there. Because I think you have to do those things first. That's the steps. Oh, that's part of the education.  So you kind of get an understanding of what, I mean, in an example of why I think this is so important, I mean, over 10 years into my career of even counting calories, doing things, I actually had never done, I'd never weighed a sweet potato until I started competing. But in the past, when we started, this was well before, you know, fat secret, my fitness power, we used to have to, I had a book called Calorie King. I remember that. And I would have to, you know, flip through it and I would look down, it would be sweet potato. One medium sweet potato. Right, it would be small, medium or large. And I would look at a sweet potato and I've got like five of my, and I see what the large one is to me, that's the big one, and then I see what a small one is and then, oh, this must be a medium one. So I, you know, medium, that's, it's a medium in comparison to the three that I have at my house, this is a medium one.  Yeah, the medium is like bigger than their large. Yeah, it's big, exactly. And so that was such an eye-opener for me. And, you know, I, so I was guesstimating my calories off by 300 plus calories just from that one food and that there's examples of that and all kinds of different. Remember the first time you weighed out five ounces of chicken breast? Oh yeah.  They're 10 ounces. Yeah, it's like a pound of chicken. You don't even realize it. And then you go, well, I need, I'm supposed to eat five. Let's see what five ounces look like. Half.  Like, oh, that's probably like six or eight ounces. Yeah, so there's a lot of things that you, there's a lot of value you get in, you know, diligently tracking your macros. And I never recommend someone staying in that place to like Sal's point. I think you can become obsessive about it. I think that it could also lead to an unhealthy relationship with food. But there's a tremendous amount of value with tracking for a period of time for you to get a really good understanding. So at least you know when you go through your day, oh, I have a pretty good idea. I was eating about this much or I'm really low on my fats or I was really low yesterday on my fats. So today, I wanna make sure that I up those. And so I think that that's important. The true takeaway is that there's a maxibon senior.


Thank you. Welcome, Aloha. Thanks so much for joining us at Think Tech Hawaii. We appreciate taking the time to join us, take a look, take a listen, and feel free to share your thoughts with us. We'll take them into account in coming weeks and episodes. And today we have the great fortune of having with us Professor Vernelia Randall, Professor Emerita of the University of the Dayton School of Law, and one of the leading national and international scholars on racism and the law. And Professor Randall's racism.org site is a compilation of some of the most comprehensive collections of articles on the subject that you'll find anywhere. Jeff Fortnoy, First Amendment and Constitutional Scholar Litigation Attorney and Partner at one of our most respected senior firms, Kate Shuddy and David Louis, former Attorney General of the State of Hawaii, Senior Litigation Attorney and Partner at the Kobayashi Sugita firm, also here in Honolulu. Thanks so much for joining us. Hey, today we thought we'd take a dabble since we're two months from the midterm elections. Hey, and some thoughts about what issues do you think might have some impact on these upcoming midterm elections? Professor Randall, you want to start us off? Any thoughts? Well, I definitely think the abortion issue will have an impact on the election. I also think that an issue important to me won't have an impact on election.  So, I mean, an abortion is an important issue, but racial justice is also. And unfortunately, I don't think it will be that will have an impact when it elects them. I think a major issue, and I didn't think it was going to be, at least with independence, is what's going on at Mar-a-Lago. And the subpoena issue as more and more is leaked out about Trump's lawlessness and carelessness, depending upon how you want to look at it in taking documents that he had no right to take. He and his lawyers, and I hope that there's going to be disbarment proceedings against at least one or more attorneys who lied on an affidavit that there were no documents at Mar-a-Lago. And depending upon the scope of the characterization of the documents, top secret, super secret, whatever all the terms are, I think people have begun, and I didn't think this was going to happen, have begun to turn on Trump and the games that his Republican colleagues continue to play in the Senate. And so, you know, I've been on the show a lot, and I've been one of the more pessimistic people about what I thought was going to happen in November. But I'm beginning to change. The polls are beginning to change. Some of the elections that have occurred over the last three months have shown that the abortion issue and some of these Trump issues are beginning to sway independence. And I think it's now very more than likely that Democrats will keep the Senate and maybe, and I'm not predicting this, maybe continue to maintain a one or two vote margin in the House. So, you know, I think it's hard to predict everybody without knowing what's going to happen in the next four to six weeks. But the chute continues to drop. So, I agree abortion will bring women out. I think forgiving the student debt, which I think is very controversial, but I think it's going to bring out a lot of younger people who will vote Democratic and I think Mar-a-Lago. So those three things I think. And a little bit, you know, the change in the gas prices, inflation is kind of steady. So we'll just see how important the economy is. It's normally the most important issue, but I think it's being overwhelmed by these other issues. So my take on this is that the biggest factor is whether independence will be so turned off by the anti-democratic rhetoric and the anti-democratic forces that have gathered behind Trump, the deniers of the election, the people who are putting themselves out there and say, you know what, I don't care what the election is. I'm ready to declare it for Trump if I get elected as the election's official. These are such extreme views and so anti-democratic that I have been very pessimistic of late. But the real question is what is the basic nature of the American people? Have the culture wars, which has been the driving force of the anti-democratic forces in Trump, have those culture wars reach the tipping point where it is a bridge too far and the basic decency of the American people will, as a group, reassert themselves and reassert itself so that we can have the Democrats come forth and succeed in an election. I mean, it's very difficult. I think it's very close. We're on a razor's edge right now. And the problem is, is that the Democrats who obviously I support, you know, they're always for process and fairness and things like that. And those things really don't matter to the GOP a whole heck of a lot. They just want control. They want to win. They don't mind the cost and they don't mind the cost of being anti-democratic. So I consider the anti-democratic forces and sentiments as the biggest piece. And I'm just hoping that that will carry the day. You know, what you're looking at is two completely opposite political realities. One is gerrymandering, which gives the Republicans tremendous advantage in most of the house races between the two mountain ranges, the Rockies and the Alleghenies. And the other is turnout. And I think the turnout issue is what the Democrats have got to hope and, you know, hope that the independence and the Democratic voters show up. And normally in midterm elections, turnout is very low. And if it's low again, then gerrymandering will rule the day. So we're just going to have to see how excited voters are going to be. And if you look at the one race in New York, where it was one on this sole issue of abortion, according to most commentators, that's because of turnout. You know, I mean, people are not that motivated during the midterm elections to vote. And I, you know, I'm sorry, have to agree with Professor Randall. I think race is a total non-issue come this November. It's been superseded by everything else. You know, Well, it's never been on the, let's not pray like it's been superseded. It's never been on the national agenda, except for some sort of superficial point. I don't feel like, because I'm far, far left first, and I am not a Democrat. And most years I haven't voted. When I do vote, I vote some other party besides Republican and Democrat. Okay. So, and we always get blamed with spoiling the election. But the problem is I have value and I don't want to be forced into the position of reneging on my own values. So someone I don't want Democrat or Republican gets in. There's a lot of people in my position. And I don't know that Democrats have done enough to win a lot of us over. I'm still not sure about what. So Professor Randall, what do you think? You know, I know the state, but I also know the state of going down the road of voting against your value. That once you go down that road, there's always another election in which there's always someone, you know, we've got to get this other party in, and then you spend four years aiding yourself for having voted for them. So I think that the Democrats, if they don't want a tight election, they might not need us to win. But they might. And I think they need to start thinking about not how to appeal to the middle, but how to appeal to the extreme. Professor Randall, I have a question for you. Do you think if race is not a big issue? And my own view is that race only becomes an issue when there's a crisis.  But my question to you is, do you think if race is not front and center with a crisis, that there will be a less turnout of people of color, of black voters, because of just the dynamics that maybe that other issues don't matter as much? I'm curious as to your viewpoint. First of all, I think many black voters are very conservative. And so I think I don't fit into the black voter norm in terms of my views. I think I would be an extreme person for a black voter. But I do think that I think that what that there's this whole conservative strange range of black voters who are balled by Trump, but who may still be voting Republican. I think there's the whole race race brings black voters out. But so does economic issues. And I think for instance, I think, and this on the websites that I'm on, which are mostly occupied by black voters, this sort of a disgust over the student long thing. Because black voters have a higher student loan debt level. And $10,000 doesn't even begin to help them skin to deal with that vote and get rid of the accumulated interest. So I think there's a lot of dissatisfaction with based on the economy, based on other economic issues. But I also think that black voters, most black voters in middle of the road, and will not want Trump to get in. And so they'll turn out, I think they'll turn out the vote because of that. I mean, you know, the reality is in a midterm election, the black vote is insignificant because it's localized in a few major metropolitan areas and in areas in the south. But in half the states, the black vote in midterms is totally insignificant. I mean, how many African Americans are in Montana and Idaho? And, you know, we can go through state by state. So, you know, in the national election, it's huge when you're dealing with popular vote in electoral college and everything else. So, you know, yes, you need let's let's take a state like Georgia. Their black votes are critical in Georgia, but they're not critical in the congressional district in Philadelphia or in New York City or, you know, San Francisco or Los Angeles. So, you know, I think the reality is it's those white middle class suburban voters who are going to make the difference in these midterm elections. I mean, that's my reality in the midterms. I have no question with you, Professor Randall, in a national election, it's really, really important. But I think this time around, not sure. I think that's a good point about the midterm. The other thing I've noticed about the election cycle, we just had our primary was the influence of money did not make a big difference in Hawaii this time. There was tremendous negative adds a huge influx of millions of dollars in a small market here. But I have a question, Jeff, because Jeff has been a foremost advocate for the First Amendment. And I have always disagreed with the Citizens United case that said that speech is money and the influx and outsized influence of big money in influencing elections. I don't know that that's going to happen. I don't know what's going to happen in this midterm. But I'm curious as to whether or not either of the other two are concerned about the outsized influence of money. Whether I'm concerned or not or whether I think it's legal are two different things. Yeah. The problem I had with Citizens United was the finding that a corporation is a person. That's a fiction that to me is absurd. And if it's going to be a person, then apply it across the board to everything else. When it does something wrong. But as David pointed out, I mean, money is always influenced elections, even in the 1700s. It may not have been as much. And frankly, people get all upset because these people are Republicans and they're given millions of dollars. There's plenty of Democrats that are given millions of dollars. So it's the way the money's used, David. And I was offended by those ads. But on a free speech basis. And I was involved in the major case here dealing with political ads.  And people can agree or disagree. And you and I have disagreed. I know it's a very controversial issue, not just in politics, but in everything else. But I'm still of the belief, and it's not going to change, that words can hurt. But I don't believe that there should be a government that says what is or is not appropriate, except for certain things, which I've always agreed with, like pornography, like defamation, and things like that. So, you know, money being poured into political races. Hey, go out there and raise it. That's just part of the reality. And we know that there's a recent mega PAC group, which has received a donation of $1.6 billion and just pointed the former head of the Federalist Society to run it. So we know that the targeting of federal judgeships continues to be a very, very high priority for the Republican Party. One of the things the Republicans did are the conservatives, I don't want to say, is that I was starting that Federalist Society and starting chapters in all the school and making it a fraternity, a sorority type situation, training up lawyers through law school with the conservative mindset and then getting them jobs and then helping each other and setting themselves up. I mean, that's brilliant. Once again, the Democrats are left at the starting gate and the conservatives have figured things out. I do not understand. In 1990, right? No, no, you go, please. I was just going to say, back in when I first started teaching, and I looked at the Federalist Society and said stuff about, you know, this is going to be a real threat. They were a threat back in 1990 in law schools to minority law professors. They petitioned against minority law professors. They did all, and they were encouraged to do that. And I never could understand over the years why the Democrats didn't develop some similar network of training lawyers within their value system. But here we are.  And then in the late 60s and early 70s began to change fairly dramatically. And of course, now it's a completely different makeup, you know, whether it's women versus men and or minorities versus whites. But, you know, there's a lot of very conservative law schools around the country that have cropped up and are putting out lots of very conservative lawyers. And even in the major schools, I mean, look at the Supreme Court and the conservative majority, where did they all go to law school? They're all from Yale and Harvard.  So which are the voting blocks that might make some difference in these upcoming elections? And it may vary from state to state. You know, I've already indicated, I think it's going to be the same group that put Biden in along with, of course, this time it won't be the African American community. But I think it's the white middle class woman and, you know, and younger voters. I think that's going to be the two groups that are going to have to show up in various places because of the gerrymandering that's gone on. And, you know, we talk about 400 and what is it? David, you're the, is it 435 house seats? There may be only be 40 that are really at play. Yeah. Right. The other 400 are done even before we start. Maybe less than four. There's only a few swing votes. There's only a few swing swing districts. So I don't disagree with Jeff. I think in the majority of the races, it's already set. I mean, they're already done. I think the main thing is in places like Georgia where, you know, voter turnout is huge. And it's going to be really important. It's interesting, you know, I mean, Kansas is deep red and Kansas voted against abortion. I look at those things and then Alaska just voted in favor of the Democratic Native American woman. Part of that is, I think people are tired of Sarah Palin and she has distinguished. It's not over yet. Yes, I know. She's going to run again and maybe she'll. No, that race isn't over yet. Oh, okay. That's a runoff. And Palin, if you look at David, if you look at the voting in Alaska, there were like, I don't know, 13 or 15 candidates. It's not unlikely that Palin's going to win that race when you look at all the other people who have dropped out and where their votes are going to go. But, you know, hopefully not so. Hopefully not so. But I mean, it's a mixed bag as to what happens. I think the most important thing is getting the voter turnout. The problem has been, I think with the Democrats and the Progressives and people on the extreme left, is that there is no one uniting ideology, okay? And the uniting ideology of the Federalists and the Conservatives has been, we hate the new society. We hate the new culture. We hate the rise of giving rights to people who never had rights before in the 1950s. And we don't like it. And we want things to go back the way they were. So that has been a uniting ideology. And there has not been a uniting ideology of the Democrats, because the Democrats have been, well, we need to be fair. We need to uphold the rule of law. We need to uphold the Constitution. Those are not propositions that get people out to vote. Okay? They're just too rational. I think I agree that the Democrats don't have a uniting ideology. And I'm not so sure that I think that the values that the Democrats articulate, I don't know. I don't know what I think that's the Democrats. I think Democrats say that, but that they too have the idea we need to win. And so then they do stuff to win, and sometimes that's fair. But I feel like that this is an argument for why we need more party, why we need a system that allows representation in the government of different, of multiple parties. As the Democrats want to adopt an ideology that will get people on board, they, except for national elections, I mean, yeah, they might find themselves at a complete disadvantage on local, more and more of a disadvantage on local level. Well, Professor Randall, I've talked to you about this. I'm not sure you want the Italian system either. I mean, multiple or the Israeli system. We can go through country by country. We can go through a list of systems. I agree with Jeff on that too. We can go through a list of systems that we will start listing systems that work. And that just like we designed a system that we thought would work, we could design a system that would work better for who we are and give us multiple representation. There's no reason, especially when you consider the fact that we really only have a one-party system. We have two branches of the same party, capitalism. Democrats represent capitalism, Republicans represent capitalism, and so we only have one party. Just like communists have multiple branches of their party. Come on, come on, the Republicans. The Republicans say that we've got a bunch of socialists, a small number of socialists in Congress. Come on. In our last, yeah, that that is that's the that we beat Democrats and people with who don't know any better. Okay, in our last minute, final thoughts. What words of wisdom, things to think about, would you lead people with? David? Get out and vote and encourage everybody to vote so that we at least have better turnout and better representation of people's thoughts. Get your passport up to date. That's my advice. And Jeff, on that note, thank you all so much. Great insights, great thoughts, great humor. Come back and join us again in a couple of weeks. Think Tech Hawaii, Professor Randall, David Louie, Jeff Fortnoy. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.


In the past few days, we have come across alarming headlines about heatwaves in the Arctic and Antarctica regions. Heatwaves also seem to be sweeping western India with the mercury rising above normal levels. In today's bit, let's try to understand the bizarre hit of heat at both the poles. What has happened? Both the polar regions of the Earth, the Arctic and the Antarctica simmered with unprecedented heatwaves simultaneously with never seen rise in temperature. The Concordia station at Antarctica recorded a temperature of about 10 degrees Fahrenheit which is 70 degrees warmer than the average. Similarly in the Arctic, the temperature was found to be 50 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average. What is unusual about this event? Both the polar regions have contrasting seasons with the Arctic starting to melt and the Antarctic beginning to freeze at the same time of the year. Simultaneous high temperatures in both the regions are therefore highly unusual with the experts terming the phenomenon dramatic and alarming. What happened in the Antarctic? The heatwave in the Antarctic was driven by an intense high pressure system located southeast of Australia coupled with an intense low pressure system over the east Antarctic interior. Another reason is the Atmospheric River, a narrow corridor of water vapor that moves through the sky. The Antarctic coast also experienced unusual rainfall. What happened in the Arctic? An intense low pressure system called the Bomb Cyclone formed of the northeast coast of the United States and an Atmospheric River formed at its junction with a high pressure system channeled warm air into the Arctic Circle. Well, is it climate change? Experts say such extreme temperatures cannot be solely attributed to climate change. It could be the cause but it is still too soon to tell. Nonetheless, this is an example of an extreme weather event and these extreme events are exceeding the model projections of global warming. Such events can become more drastic if greenhouse emissions are not reduced. There is also an overall decline in the Arctic sea ice and the Antarctic sea ice hit a record summer low. The Arctic Ocean is absorbing more sunlight than reflecting it due to less ice. This speeds up global warming. The impact. The Arctic has been warming twice or thrice as fast as the rest of the world whereas the Antarctic Peninsula is warming five times faster. The unusual warming in both poles is alarming when artificial climate change does not appear to be under control. The Antarctic sea ice is also expected to be lost as the warming increases. Sea ice levels in the region hit their lowest ever coverage area in the past 43 years. The ice breaking due to warm conditions in the Arctic can negatively impact animals such as polar bears. Melting sea ice also affects the indigenous people in the Arctic by disrupting their livelihood. The rainfall on the Antarctic coast may have affected local mosses but the overall damage to plant life is still unknown. The overall warming also results in drastic weather conditions in the rest of the world. What can be done? A recent study suggests that reducing methane emissions by 2030 combined with net zero CO2 emissions by 2050 could prevent the complete loss of Arctic sea ice by 80%. Human activities causing artificial climate change need to be stalled immediately to avoid the irreversible effect of this unusual warming.


He's been watching for some time and so far I guess he snapped into it then I hope so did he have anything to say about the way I talked to him yesterday no no he didn't Ted I left him shortly after that and went over to Max how about last night well we didn't talk very much I could see he was pretty much upset so I thought it best not to talk to him yeah that was a smart thing to do I guess and I can understand how I feel oh sure so can I but I certainly didn't like his attitude yesterday you know Lee Jerry has the makings of a very good cadet I'm sure of that that's why I talked to him the way I did I know what you mean all right all right too much like it seems to be doing all right he handles his mind okay oh Jerry's a good little horseman all he needs is the spirit I think he'll get that oh I'm sure he will hey look at that Warren certainly knows the thing or two about writing yes I was noticing him to certainly does doesn't splendor grand out there among all those bays pure white makes a nice picture all right oh but look at red he doesn't seem to take the turns as clean as the rest I thought he'd show better than that especially after playing polo well it's just those last couple of turns that he's missed on he's been doing all right all right we work on those formations later column right wheel well that was pretty they were all together on that move that was good cool oh all right line up there let's watch this that will be enough formation for a while very good I think it's safe to say that we have a very good team lined up now and you show a lot of promise I'm very optimistic about our meeting with EMI that's a sort of a talk that gives them confidence Sergeant Alden gets a lot out of the fellas that way I see a couple of satisfied smiles out there now on a four-foot hurdle that may seem rather high for you new men but we're not going to start jumping over matchsticks we've got the master high jump so we may as well start right now that's about here this is going to be good work while watching it any right good Jerry looks so serious I was noticing I remember men don't take off too soon if plenty of free rain in the jump and watch your balance all right lead off man go hey that was a nice getaway there he goes for the hurdle he's over and clean to that was pretty all right next man go there goes Jim Cooper boy great horseman up and over all pretty now the next man go hey you go Jerry now watch this looks like he knows what he's doing here he goes watch it up over hey that was all right he's going to do fine man go that was a nice jump Jerry made yeah there goes Paul Warren hey wait balance he's jumping he's that was a bad spell come on me let's go over there she fell off just as he landed gosh she's not getting up hurry it up please come on right behind me I'll handle this what can we be of some help charging yes we got my horse there you heard one I don't my arm a shoulder take it easy old man just lie still a second speaking your legs out it's my right shoulder hold it still hold it still Morrison right over to the side and get some water hey there's a little cut on his forehead we'll clean that up just a scratch how does this happen Warren I don't know sir I can't imagine what happened my saddles seem to slip just as I was coming out of the jump saddles wait a minute Medicare yes sir go over there and get Splendor hold him and see that no one gets nervous till I'm finished here yes sir here you are sir here's the water oh well thanks Mars I hear you are Paul just take a sip of this water thanks that's better take my handkerchief out of my back pocket more yes sir here you are thank you there how's that better thanks I mean thank you sir oh you can skip that for now see that Mars and it's just a little scratch on his head yeah that's all it is oh try your legs now Paul can you move them yeah yeah they're all right good how about your left arm let's see yep that's okay you think you can walk over to the infirmary oh sure I can walk all right help me up red sure there you go easy now easy now look out for that right arm I can send for the station right in the stretcher oh no sir I'm all right I can walk over all right then you better not waste any time let Dr. Campbell look you have a right away he'll probably want to take x-rays oh you go along with him Morrison give him a little help if he needs it yes come on oh look wait a minute take your left hand and put it under your right elbow warrant you can study your arm and your shoulder that way oh and Morrison Dr. Campbell to call me and give me a report on warrants condition as soon as he finds the trouble yes sir I will that met camp yes sir here sir oh okay all the rest of your men are dismissed for the day unsaddle and check in now on the same time tomorrow that's all true Paul wait a minute you didn't all take that jump I want you to go back and start with a first man over again now line up Phillips leave my horse over to the stable please no time up anywhere all ready first man go here's Splendor sir just hang on to him until all these men make the jump yes sir next man go see you think they'd be a little leery of that jump after seeing what just happened and that's just exactly why I'm having him go ahead and take the jump yes sir I understand that next man go the rest of you men space yourselves and follow through line up in squads on the other side of the field when you make the jump watch it now all right the next man go ahead nice clean jumps I'd say the good bunch of riders now let me see this saddle yes sir what is it now look you being the highest ranking cadet officer and chief of staff I'm going to let you in on this it looks very bad what is it sir on the first place I want you to understand this I personally saddle each and every horse that was used in the drill today I checked and rechecked watch stir up adjustments and had every mounts equipment properly adjusted before the cadets took over their animals yes sir I'm very fussy about equipment being right met care you know in polo and in jumping and it's very important yes sir I know that all right now look this saddle on Splendor has slipped back at least four inches that's right it has and it most likely slipped further than that but in landing without warning it had slid forward a bit now I look here take a look at this cinch strap you see where the cinch strap that goes under the horse is marked in the leather right here in this third notch yes sir there's a mark warning the leather at that point right but you'll notice the buckle isn't where the leather is worn I think I know what you mean exactly someone has loosened this saddle someone after I tighten the cinch put it down to the fourth notch I can't imagine anyone doing a little trick like that sir all right but that's just exactly what happened I don't like to say this but it's the truth when I came out of my office in the sable I saw I saw Juergen leaving the stalls he was the first boy out here this afternoon what's that yes yes I did met Kev I didn't think anything about it at the time but I'm beginning to put two and two together hey wait a minute oh well what is it oh he couldn't do a thing like that knowing that it might hurt someone what well I don't like to say this either but well these things have to be handled just all right all right what is it well yesterday afternoon Juergen made a remark to me that ties in with this what was that he said if if he didn't get to ride Splendor no one else would you sure about that that's what he said sir huh well doesn't look so good for Dugan does it truthfully it doesn't all I hate to think he'd do a thing like this but looks like a very clear case against him wait a moment cadet Dugan dismount and report over here and the rest of the company is dismissed unsaddle and check in about the same time tomorrow that's all are you going to question him sir I'm going to give him a chance to confess it'll be a lot easier on him if he does you don't think anyone else could possibly have done it oh no no I'm sure of it when I finish saddling those horses I went right into my office and there was no one else near the stalls except as I say I saw Dugan coming out just before the rest of the men got here and that's it what must be no one else will ride Splendor if I don't huh yeah that's what he said here he is oh well Dugan yes sir you were the first man out here today that right I don't know sir I guess I was I saw you coming out of the stable before the other men got here you were out back by the stalls right yes sir I went out to see Splendor I brought him a couple of pieces of sugar I always used to bring him sugar when he was with the circuit he liked it so much I just alright Dugan alright that'll be all you have anything else to say no sir take your mount back to the stable on saddle and check in yes come on Metcalf here I'll eat Splendor back in here's the rain sir you you heard that didn't you met care he was back there supposedly feeding sugar to Splendor yes sir really looks bad for him now I don't think there's any doubt about it it's a shame the boy let his emotions get away from him like that you know this will be on the doubt the worst thing I've ever seen happen why Warren might have been killed in the fall like he took I don't like this a bit it's going to be very distasteful the worst thing I've ever encountered in my stay at Farrokhs I just can't make myself believe it's true always seems a regular I know exactly how you feel and I feel the same way so go pretty bad with him I guess there's no doubt about that this poor innocent horse here is the cause of it all yes and I just like having Mr Randall know his gift to this fine animal brought on those trouble bad met kept very bad whoa there's plenty whoa whoa whoa settle down you you'd better take over Metcalf yes sir tension cadet Dugan yes sir step forward Dugan cadet Dugan report to Major Davis in 30 minutes in full dress uniform the rest of the troop as you were


Can the Hotel Transylvania property strike lightning four times over? Would it be a question I would ask if Hotel Transylvania 3 was any good? Short answer? No. The Sandler Monster Pack is back, baby. We have David Spade, Keegan-Michael Key, Andy Sandberg, Fran Drescher, Molly Shannon, Steve Buscemi, Selena Gomez, Adam Sandler of- What? He's not in this one? Ah, that would explain the incredibly weird intro to this film. For some reason, and I couldn't actually find an answer as of recording, Adam Sandler isn't back for the fourth installment. Some are speculating, and I think it's fair to piggyback off the concept that Adam Sandler is under contract with Netflix and he can't do films for competing streaming services. I don't want to brag, but I am an Amazon Prime member. Yeah, I'll give you a second to let that sink in.  Transformania. It's a great title. It's a great title. It was a bold move, Codden, for the first couple of minutes to feature Drax back on his yoke, playing just the two of us. For starters, it's a different voice actor and it sounds horrible. Like, this rendition of just the two of us is miserable. Secondly, we already had the definitive version of that song in Austin Powers 2. Dr. Evil sings it to many me. It's a beautiful number. It's perfect. If we're not already looking at the Will Smith version to begin with, which was already a masterpiece. So, a really bad way to kick things off. Now, I'm sure Brian Hull is very talented. He's the new voice actor. I guess he got big on YouTube for doing some impressions of Adam Sandler and other actors. It's just not translating one to one. There's definitely something missing. Some of the speech pattern, some of the way he pronounces things. It's off. Andy Samberg, who I find incredibly charming and lovable, is bad in this. He is really obnoxious. I think it doesn't help that they give his character a much bigger focus this time. Instead of being more of a playoff of Drax, he's kind of the star of the show. And man, is it annoying. And my beautiful Selena Gomez. Back is Mavis. Not even trying to do a voice. She's just straight up Selena Gomez. It's not like she was really putting on a show before. I just didn't notice as much Gomez. In the previous three films. The animation is still very lively. Still has that Tartakovsky brand on it. But he's not directing anymore. I don't think he even directed the third one. I'm not entirely sure, but it would make sense that he didn't because that one's not very good. And this one's just atrocious. This is a property that had a little bit of bite in the first couple entries, pun intended. Now it's just completely for children. And I don't even know what age group because I had two kids watch this. A 12 year old and a nine year old. Bored to death. Didn't like it, weren't impressed. My wife fell asleep on the couch. I was in and out. I just can't anymore with this property. It's well past its prime. And hopefully they leave this thing out. The plot once again revolves around Drax and his trepidious relationship with Jonathan is son-in-law. Dracula's ready to unhinge the fangs, hang up the cape, call it a day on Hotel Transylvania. Let Mavis take control. It's something she's always dreamed of doing so it seems to make sense. She's good at what she does.  Drax knows it. Everyone but Mavis knows it and he can't possibly let this dude be in charge of the hotel.  It's been a while since I've seen these other Hotel Transylvania movies but I feel like we've kind of let this well run dry. Their relationship has been rocky but it was resolved three times over. And now once again, we're going back to this well. So where does this crazy Transformania come into play? We're gonna see humans turn into monsters and vice versa. Yeah, it's just as lame as you think it would be. Well, what happens is Dracula once again throws out a lie to Jonathan. He says, John, booby, you gotta be a monster in order to run my hotel, blah, blah, blah, things of that nature. Well, Jonathan takes that to heart. And he heads on down to the basement to Van Helsing who conveniently has such an object to turn a person into a monster. Van Helsing tells them he spent three years tracking this thing down. It's very rare and hard to find. And I guess I don't really know why Van Helsing wanted it to begin with because he's never used it once.  Van Helsing had no idea because he's never used it himself. So why? Why track it down? Maybe he's just a collector. Fair. I guess fair. I know it's an animated family movie so we don't have to think too much about the plot. But when my kids start to question things right away, that's how you know you're failing on all levels. One such example would be right away at the beginning. We find out that Drax has Professor Xavier Powers where he can freeze all humans and creatures that aren't vampires. He stops time, starts interacting with objects, and then he pops it back up so everybody doesn't know what happened. Not even 10 minutes later, he's chasing down Jonathan throughout the entire hotel and my kids are like, why doesn't he just freeze him? The kid's right there. Just freeze him. Well, it's a fair question. And I turned to him and I said, yeah, that power's never gonna come up again. And it didn't. Listen, I'm not a hater of this franchise. I really enjoy the first two quite a bit. The third one's even watchable. There's some funny ideas. And that's not to say the fourth is outright terrible. There are a couple of cute parts in it. Usually it revolves around visuals, characters shrinking down, flying sideways through buildings and different objects and debris. The animation's lovely. As far as the humor from the written word? No, there's not a single line I can think back on and go, ah, that was funny. Wait, there was one. And I'm pretty sure it's in the trailer where one of the zombies turns back human and he's like, hey, I'm a human again. And then he gets bit and goes right back to a zombie. That was funny. I laughed there. That was the only time. The movie's done in 88 minutes. It's not even an hour and a half. This is Men in Black one running time. So you would think it would be in and out. It would get its laughs. It doesn't overstay its welcome. The whole movie overstays its welcome. This didn't need to be made. Shouldn't have been made. If you're looking for a target demo for this film, I'd say we're looking five years of age to eight. And that's being kind of generous. I just don't see any adults really enjoying this at all.  Oh, and if you're looking forward to more of Jonathan and Mavis' cute little boy, he's in it for one scene and then never again. Who's watching this child? They just leave him alone at the hotel while they go off on their misadventures. It's weird. The whole transforming from monsters into humans and vice versa could have been funny. There's just not a lot of jokes there to play off of. The Frankenstein becoming a good-looking dude. That was funny, but it's played out. And really that was the only thing I found even remotely interesting. It was just a bad ill-conceived concept to take up an entire movie. And clearly by the runtime, they figured this out as they were going. This should have been a short 10-minute thing on Amazon Prime instead of a full feature-length film. Much like the movie itself, this review probably didn't need to happen. I think we all know what we're gonna get from a Hotel Transylvania 4, especially if you watch the other three. The quality's not going up over time. It's dipping pretty far. Let me know if you wasted time watching this fourth outing. Leave a comment below. Like the video if you had a good time. Subscribe if you haven't. I put out reviews and rants and whatnot every single week here. Love to have you on board. Hopefully I'll see you around. Take care. Hey, since you stuck around, maybe think about joining me on Patreon at Patreon.com slash AdamDoesMovies or right here via the YouTube Join button. There's a dollar tier on Patreon. There's a 4.99 tier here. It's just a nice way to say, hey, Adam, I love what you're doing. Keep it up. Here's a couple bucks a month. Stay the course, man. Otherwise, who knows how long I'll be doing this for without the support? And how will you know if Hotel Transylvania 17 is gonna be any good or not?


Resonance is all around us, from musical instruments to playground swings, and even large structures such as skyscrapers and bridges. Resonance can occur just about anywhere. In some cases, like the swing, resonance can be a positive quality. If someone pushes you on a swing at just the right speed in sync with its natural frequency, it propels you higher. But in some cases, resonance can be detrimental. Take the 1940 Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse, for example. Before its collapse, the bridge experienced large amplitude oscillations when the wind was blowing. The collapse occurred when the wind generated flutter in the structure, which matched the structure's natural frequency, causing large amplitude oscillations and stressing the bridge beyond its design strength. All materials have a natural frequency, and thus can experience resonance. But where does this property originate? Is it a material property? Is it independent of material and a function of the structure? These are all interesting questions, so the natural conclusion is that we need, you guessed it, a hypothesis. I know that all materials exhibit a natural frequency and have a resonance frequency. If you look very closely at a few skyscrapers, you might see them swaying in the wind a bit. Tall buildings and bridges are mostly made of the same materials, so they must have the same natural frequency. Therefore, I will make the following hypothesis. Natural frequency is a material property and is not influenced by design. So now we'll need an experiment to test our hypothesis. A good way to test if something is material or design driven is to use the same base materials while varying the design a bit. This would allow us to compare the results directly and see if our variations have an influence on the outcome. Now that we have the general idea for our test, let's add in a few more specifics. While I don't have a bridge lying around to test, and you probably don't either, we can use some smaller items for experiment. I have here two foam blocks, two wooden skewers of different sizes, two batteries, and a roll of tape. Put together, they form our two test specimens. One end of each skewer is pushed into the foam block, with the other end supporting a battery tape to it. The result is two systems that have the same mass, but slightly different designs. Now let's get to testing. To test our hypothesis, we'll need to induce resonance. By shaking the foam block back and forth, we'll try to excite the resonance frequency. Let's first take a look at the design with a shorter skewer. When we start shaking the block, the battery and the skewer mostly move along with the same motion of the block. And the amplitude certainly isn't increasing. It doesn't appear to be resonating at all. Well, we hypothesize that design doesn't factor into resonance, so we would expect the long skewer design to behave similarly. But wait a second, it's not acting in the same way. When we give this one a shake, the battery almost immediately starts to oscillate at higher amplitudes. This is definitely a distinct difference from the other test we did. So now what can we learn from our experiment? Based on our hypothesis, our oscillating structures should have behaved in the same way, but they didn't. What we saw was that there was a clear difference between the short skewer setup and the long skewer setup. Therefore, we can say that our hypothesis has been disproved, and that the resonance is indeed influenced by structural design. But what does this mean in the greater engineering sense? If we go back to the Tacoma-Nara's bridge, this conclusion makes sense because the bridge wasn't constructed out of different materials than other bridges at the time. The key difference was how the bridge was built and what design decisions were made. Mass, material stiffness, and geometry all play a significant role in structural resonance. And this principle of resonance isn't only applicable to big structures like bridges, but is also used by engineers to drive the design of structures which are joined together and can independently oscillate, such as a spacecraft launch vehicle. Maybe one day you'll look at designing a structure and use resonance frequency to ensure it will operate safely.


he chose gate number 13 which gives you two consecutive races when you'll start on gate four and heat four and then you'll go to gate one and heat five and if Wuffendon can pick up at least two points here he'll be satisfied and then utilize the inside gate could have five points out of the first two rides great way to start the Grand Prix he is desperate to win he's been second three times he wants to be on top of the box tonight that's for sure absolutely right the Guta though can he make it four wins from gate one the Guta's made a decent start now what can the man in blue, Freddie Ligurandou Wuffendon have just been pushed to the back to third place here now he's going to try the inside run off! Ligurandon pulled a big locker going into turn three Wuffendon really had no where to go and that was a really awkward moment for him you've got to remember Wuffendon's coming back from a broken back that's the worry so we can confirm now that Ty Wuffendon is disqualified as the primary cause of the stoppage so in the opinion of the referee Ty Wuffendon caused the stoppage of that race well if you see it again Freddie Ligurandou has pulled a massive locker right in front of him there's no way Wuffendon would have run into him if he hadn't have done so I just again that is a decision that I disagree with Freddie Ligurandou there is almost coming to a stand still he's pulled a massive locker and Wuffendon just had no where to go he's run straight into the back of him what was he expected to do to jump off the bike he's walking back which is great to see like Wuffendon just can't avoid him so to add insult to injury he's been thrown out of the race as well which I don't agree with he's not happy he's just known and rightly so