Saturday, May 3, 2025
Home Blog Page 938

Mark Hamilton: Build your media filter based on science, not narrative

By MARK HAMILTON

(Editor’s note: This is the eighth in a series by Mark Hamilton about the history of the Pebble Project in Alaska.)

We are engaged in a contest between facts and narratives. This observation has been discussed in several books and papers recently, but I believe it is important for all of us to be aware of the unequal battlefield to which we are subjected.

This is a necessary exercise in order to decide what kind of “filter” you wish to arm yourself with in considering any controversial issue.  

Sadly, the very word “controversial” has been highjacked by the narrative crowd. In seeking audiences to inform about the Pebble mine project, I was turned down many times with the (usually regretful) statement, “We don’t allow controversial subject matters.” What? The word “controversial” simply means there are opinions on both sides of an issue.  How has this become a “hands off” topic?

Nowhere is this attitude more harmful than on our university campuses. My 12 years as the president of the University of Alaska thankfully predated an alarming trend. Understand that the foundation of higher learning is the dialectic. This protocol describes the contest of ideas, wherein a thesis, developed, supported, and explained confronts an antithesis (anti-thesis) also developed, supported and explained to be reasoned together in search of a synthesis (a newly discovered blending) that will more closely approximate truth. These contests of ideas do not necessarily require emotional indifference, indeed childlike name calling has added a bit of spice to several of these historical intellectual duels. While there may be room for emotion and passion, these diminish in the face of data and research.

What is the new learning protocol when we observe multiple universities creating “safe zones”?  Spaces that specifically outlaw conflicting ideas. Without the conflict of ideas, without the allowance of antitheses, without the reasoning together, what is left of our ability to learn?  We are left with uncontested narratives to voice opinions devoid of fact.  

Only slightly better are contested narratives assuming they are allowed on the social media link you are a part of. At least in the weighing of contested narratives, you could detect logical fallacies, or outrageous exaggerations.

What about facts?  It’s just too easy to exclaim we can never determine the facts. Of course, you can.  It may involve listening to several, certainly more than one news agency, discovering the differing interpretations, and exploring the issue yourself.  It may involve searching the several sources of baseline data compiled by agencies with no agenda except formulating their business model.  Insurance companies care about valid statistics about age and gender to construct their insurance plans, not to issue a public opinion.

Their data might be more reliable than data quoted to support a narrative.  

True, there are a huge number of issues that you just don’t care to research yourself. I certainly join you in that. In those situations, assuming that we are interested in the resolution of the debate, we are forced to rely on experts.  But here we are faced with a similar problem, which experts to rely on.

As you build your own filter, I recommend you look closely at the track record of reliability. What source of facts has predicted the outcome? That’s what your filter should do, help you in determining the outcome of controversial issues.

For example, if your sources have predicted that the world’s oil will run out in the next decade on three or four previous occasions, and that has not occurred; it’s time to find a new expert.  

Insistence on dealing with facts can deal you out of a lot of current discussions. Facts need to be verified; narratives only need to be repeated.

But while you are depending on experts, narratives are depending on clicking “SHARE.” There is no need for a narrative to disprove your facts if they can just overwhelm you with repetition; how many followers do you have? How many do they have?

While you are looking for a “LIKE” with logic; opponents are getting a “COMMENT” with emotion.

It will take some time to build your own filter, it will involve testing it with your own predictions, or predicting the path of opponents’ narratives. Only then can you avoid getting “Pebbled.”

The “Pebbled” series at Must Read Alaska is authored by Mark Hamilton. After 31 years of service to this nation, Hamilton retired as a Major General with the U. S. Army in July of 1998. He served for 12 years as President of University of Alaska, and is now President Emeritus. He worked for the Pebble Partnership for three years before retiring. The series continues next week. 

Pebbled 1: Virtue signaling won out over science in project of the century

Pebbled 2: Environmental industry has fear-mongering down to an art

Pebbled 3: The secret history of ANWR and the hand that shaped it

Pebbled 4: When government dictates an advance prohibition

Pebbled 5: EPA ‘just didn’t have time’ to actually go to Bristol Bay

Pebbled 6: The narrative of fear

Pebbled 7: The environmentalists who cried wolf

Coast Guard, CDC: We’ll change the mask rule, but for now won’t enforce masks on fishing boats, commercial vessels, ferries

13

The Centers for Disease Control and U.S. Coast Guard, reversing their position from less than a month ago, said the federal agencies will no longer enforce its rule for wearing a mask in “outdoor areas of transportation conveyances or while outdoors at transportation hubs.”

That means commercial vessels like cruise ships, ferries, fishing boats, and charters won’t require passengers to mask up for those who are outdoors. And people don’t have to wear masks at “transportation conveyances,” such as train stations.

Marine Safety Information Bulletin (MISB) 02-21 Change 2 reflects updated enforcement policy.

To be clear, the rule still exists, but the agencies will not enforce it.

“Relatedly, CDC announced that, until it can amend the Order, it will exercise its enforcement discretion to not require wearing a mask in outdoor areas of transportation conveyances or while outdoors at transportation hubs,” the CDC wrote.

Read: CDC says fishing crews must wear masks

Earlier this year at a fishing conference, Sen. Dan Sullivan called the fishing crew mask rule “stupid.”

“Now we have another stupid regulation that our fishermen need to wear masks. Senator Murkowski and I have been pressing this relentlessly on a call with the Coast Guard commandant, a call with the White House guy who’s supposedly in charge of all the CDC issues, we had a meeting with the head of the CDC, we are trying to explain to them how, no offense, but just how stupid this is and how uninformed it is. And it could be a safety issue, not with regard to COVID, but with having to wear masks when you’re out on the deck of a ship in 30 foot waves trying to bring in gear or pots. So, we’re going to continue to work on that one,” Sullivan said.

Gov. Inslee letter to Blinken, Mayorkas: Reopen border, use of vaccine passport

24

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee sent a letter this month to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, requesting immediate full or partial reopening of the U.S.-Canadian border to provide relief for individuals and communities along the Washington-British Columbia border.

Inslee is a Democrat who has enacted harsh lockdown policies in Washington State to contain the Covid-19 pandemic. He is requesting the use of a vaccine passport at the border, which would be voluntary for re-entry into the United States.

All of Washington moved into Phase 3 of Inslee’s reopening plan after a two-week pause in May. In Phase 3, event facilities with permanent seating are allowed to seat at 25 percent capacity for spectators who are physically distanced and wearing masks. Bars and restaurants are limited to 50 percent capacity. The state may fully reopen on June 30.

But Inslee wants the Biden Administration to pressure Canada to loosen its restrictions. Currently, the border is closed to all but essential traffic, which means Alaska border communities such as Haines, Skagway, and Hyder are cut off from commercial and transportation centers on the Canadian side of the border, and the entire state is cut off from

The letter reads, in part: 

“Washington state has taken a science-based approach to the pandemic and has enacted public health measures that prioritize safety and protect the lives of Washingtonians. Because of rising vaccination rates, Washington State has a plan to reopen our economy statewide by June 30. Therefore, I respectfully request that the United States and Canadian governments, and specifically your departments, work to find innovative ways to reopen the border consistent with public health guidance.

“If a full border opening is not considered feasible, I would like to recommend that we prioritize the development of specific policies to partially open crossings. The hardships being experienced along the U.S.-Canadian border are significant, and measurable forward progress is needed,” Inslee wrote.

In addition to a reopening of the border, the governor also asked for additional actions, including:

  • A binational approach that uses the NEXUS program as a way for travelers to voluntarily share vaccine records electronically with both the US and Canada.
  • Using the ArriveCAN platform that is required for entry into Canada to share vaccine records and/or negative test results.

“The state of Washington and our friends in British Columbia stand ready to assist the federal governments in the development of pilot programs to safely open the border. We share a sense of urgency in meeting the needs of our impacted communities, with more than 60 percent of BC residents having received a first dose of vaccination, and a similar percentage of Washingtonians vaccinated, we believe that we can significantly mitigate the health risks associated with reopening our border by continuing to follow a data-driven, science-based approach and the guidance of our public health experts,” Inslee wrote.

Read the full letter here

Biden not improving with time

You go into the woods for a few days and when you come back you learn the Biden administration is no brighter than when you left.

Now, these guys want to “repeal or replace” the roadless rule in the Tongass National Forest – or as greenies and liberals call it, the Tongass National Park and Preserve. That would overturn a Trump policy affecting 9.3 million acres of the 58.5 million acres of the national forest forest originally put off-limits by President Bill Clinton in 2001.

The Trump rule, instituted about three months before he left office, allowed roads and other development in more than half the forest, one the world’s largest intact temperate rainforests.

USDA Communications Director Matt Herrick says “the Trump administration’s decision on the Alaska roadless rule was controversial and did not align with the overwhelming majority of public opinion across the country and among Alaskans.”

Maybe, maybe not, but Gov. Mike Dunleavy promises to push back against the Biden effort.

”From tourism to timber, Alaska’s great Tongass National Forest holds much opportunity for Alaskans, but the federal government wishes to see Alaskans suffer at the lack of jobs and prosperity,” he said in a tweet.

We are left to wonder what it all means for a house-building market already reeling from skyrocketing lumber prices. The Biden administration seems to think the best way to deal with a crisis is to make it worse.

Yep, no doubt about it. The Biden administration certainly is no brighter than when we left.

Naked power grab: Biden to rewrite ‘waters’ rule; will affect Alaska above all other states

The Biden administration plans to reverse yet another Trump environmental policy. Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency will once again redefine the Waters of the United States rule, known as WOTUS.

The Trump revision of the rule streamlined the definition of WOTUS, after Barack Obama gave the EPA extraordinary control over everything from lakes to puddles.

Trump gave property owners more protection from the federal overreach by trimming back the jurisdiction of the EPA and Army Corps.

Now, the Biden Administration is going to put together a new WOTUS definition, something that Biden promised to do before he was elected. In fact, on his first day in office, he ordered the EPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to review the WOTUS rule.

“A broadened definition [of WOTUS] will require more projects to get federal permits. This will increase project expenses, timelines, and uncertainty without a corresponding environmental benefit,” Gov. Mike Dunleavy wrote in a statement.

Alaska has nearly half the water in the nation, with more than three million lakes, 365,000 miles of rivers, and countless unnavigable glaciers, permafrost, and wetlands.

“For the Biden administration and the EPA to redefine waters is nothing more than a naked power grab for federal rule from Washington, D.C. Make no mistake, the ability of Alaskans to harvest timber, develop oil and gas, mine the critical minerals needed for national security, and the ability to farm and hunt are in danger with this announcement. It would be less insulting to the State of Alaska if the Biden EPA came out transparently with its intent to turn our land into a national park under the management of rangers,” Dunleavy said.

The definition and scope of WOTUS has been litigated for years and has created uncertainty for the business community and home builders. The 2015 WOTUS rule was universally criticized by agriculture, manufacturing, and real estate development sectors of the economy. It was  repealed in 2019.

Alaska has been supportive of a waters rule that understands and exempts the unique conditions of permafrost and wetlands in Alaska. Approximately 63 percent of Alaska is covered by permafrost and in many places wetlands overlays permafrost.

In 2015, Sen. Dan Sullivan worked to fix the 2015 Obama-era WOTUS rule, but was not successful. Watch him speak about it on the floor of the Senate:

Nielsen: Tucker Carlson dominates cable news shows

5

According to Nielsen, the Tucker Carlson Tonight show was the top cable news show in total viewers in May, with an average of 2.94 million, followed by Hannity with 2.63 million, The Five at 2.63 million, The Rachel Maddow Show with 2.52 million and The Ingraham Angle with 2.06 million

Fox News dominated the competition in May, but overall cable news viewership declined from the same period in 2020, when the presidential election and Covid-19 drove the news programs to higher rates. The Biden presidency doesn’t offer the kind of compelling drama of the 2020 election cycle.

In primetime, Fox News averaged 2.17 million viewers, down 37% from the same period a year earlier; MSNBC posted 1.49 million, down 22%; and CNN drew under one million — 913,000, down a concerning 45%.

Across America, Tucker Carlson had three of the top five spots for cable viewership, beat out only by the NBA playoffs.

Gay Americans, isolated as a group in the Nielsen survey, had completely different news preferences during the survey week of May 17. They are getting their news analysis on cable from Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, and Lawrence O’Donnell, all of MSNBC:

Dan Fagan: Is Lisa Murkowski pulling Dan Sullivan to the left?

By DAN FAGAN

It stung recently when Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan announced his endorsement of his Senate colleague Lisa Murkowski if she chooses to run for re-election next year. Sullivan even upped the ante when he told Alaskans he considered he and Murkowski a good team. 

For most conservatives who had long been fans of Sullivan, it was like having the wind knocked out of us. How could Sullivan characterize as a good team member someone who had single handily saved Obamacare, refused to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, voted to impeach President Donald Trump, and is one of the most pro-abortion legislators in the history of our republic?

If Sullivan is glad to have Murkowski on his team, the question must be asked: Whose team is he on? 

Does Sullivan understand the devastating grip the D.C. Swamp has on our nation? Does he understand the ever-growing power shift away from the average American and the private sector working class toward the D.C. insiders and connected elite? Does Sullivan get that when he describes he and Murkowski as a good team, he incriminates himself as someone loyal to the Swamp? 

You’d be hard-pressed to find a Republican who’s more of a Swamp creature than Murkowski. 

In Sullivan’s defense, he endorsed Murkowski before conservative candidate Kelly Tshibaka announced her intent to challenge Alaska’s senior senator next year. 

On my show Friday, I asked Tshibaka why she thought Sullivan endorsed Murkowski.  

“It’s typical for U.S. Senators to stick together,” said Tshibaka. “A lot of them (U.S. senators) are donating to Lisa Murkowski’s campaign. That’s what D.C. does. That doesn’t surprise me. They have to work together. I’m not so concerned about what people in D.C. do for people in D.C.” 

If Tshibaka is correct and state senate delegations typically work together, would it not stand to reason Murkowski is pulling Sullivan her way politically? 

The publication Conservative Review rates senators based on their votes. Murkowski comes in second to last among Republicans with a liberty score of only 29%. Only Maine’s Susan Collins was lower with 12%. 

Conservative Review gave Sullivan a liberty score of 53%. Higher than Murkowski’s 29% but lower than 28 of Sullivan’s fellow Senate Republicans.

Compare Sullivan’s 53% liberty rating to conservative warriors like Marsha Blackburn 89%, Tommy Tuberville 90% Rand Paul 94% and Mike Lee 94%. Sullivan is clearly not at the forefront of fighting the cold civil war engulfing our nation. 

Another conservative group, Heritage Action for America, gives Sullivan even lower marks. The group’s ranking system gives Sullivan a lower conservative rating than even Utah’s Mitt Romney among Republican senators. 

Only two other Republican senators have a lower conservative rating than Sullivan according to Heritage Action for America: Collins and Murkowski. Murkowski earned the group’s lowest ranking among Republican senators when it comes to voting to uphold liberty. 

If Murkowski is pulling Sullivan left and increasing his loyalty to the D.C. Swamp, it would give yet another reason for Alaska conservatives to vote for Tshibaka. 

Or it could be Sullivan isn’t quite the conservative he campaigns to be. It’s no secret many of Sullivan’s D.C. staffers and top advisors lean left. That’s always raised a red flag. 

Sullivan voted to confirm rabid anti-oil and gas development nominee Deb Haaland to Interior Secretary. One of the first things Haaland did on the job was suspend oil and gas leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  

Think of all the years the late Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens spent fighting to get ANWR open. It’s finally open and yet Alaska’s two U.S. Senators voted to approve the nomination of the very person who for all practical purposes closed it again. 

And then there’s Sullivan’s vote to confirm Alejandro Mayorkas as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Sullivan was one of only six Senate Republicans to confirm Mayorkas. 

Mayorkas has long been a vocal proponent of open borders and amnesty for illegals breaking into America. Mayorkas may be one of the most radical members of Joe Biden’s cabinet. 

The appointment of Mayorkas was a big win for the Mexican drug cartels making millions smuggling illegals in our nation now that our Southern border is for all practical purposes wide open.

The Heritage Foundation estimates the appointment of Mayorkas will add a quarter of a million new illegal aliens to our nation in the first quarter of 2021 alone.

One perk U.S. senators have is they only run every six years. That’s a long time and allows for considerable forgetfulness among some voters.  

Murkowski has masterfully used this to her advantage running as a conservative every six years in hopes voters will forget her record. 

But times are different, and many Americans have awakened to the self-serving agenda and the destruction caused by the ruling elites. It’s not as easy to say one thing during a campaign and do another after elected. Voters are watching now more than ever. 

Sullivan would be wise to remember that. Hitching his wagon to Murkowski, who has an 87% disapproval rating among Republicans in the state, is not something most will forget. 

Dan Fagan hosts the number one rated morning drive radio show in Alaska on Newsradio 650 KENI. 

Warrior braids: Air Force issues new, updated regs for women’s hair styles

The U.S. Air Force on Friday officially updated its rules about how women in the service branch can wear their hair. As of June 25, women’s hair worn in a bun, braid, or ponytail may extend six inches to the right and left and also may protrude in back by six inches from the point where the hair is gathered, the Air Force said in a statement. The total width for the hair must still allow for the proper wear of headgear.

This means ponytails, braids, and buns and is an accommodation for minority women who have curly hair. The revision of Air Force Instruction 36-2903, grooming standards, addresses the differences in hair density and texture and a more diverse workforce.

Previously, hair worn in a bun, braid, ponytail or equivalent could not extend beyond the width of the head.

Members must still be mindful of occupational safety, fire and health guidance, and mishap prevention, and must reduce the chance of injury from having loose hair around machinery, equipment, or moving parts.

The U.S. Space Force Guardians will adhere to the grooming standards of the U.S. Air Force until the Space Force develops its own policy.

The development of the new hair standards has been underway for several months and some of the new rules took effect earlier this year.

Report: Suicides on Alaska military bases spiking in 2021

11

 Six soldiers stationed in Alaska have died by suicide between January and May of 2021, a surprising statistic, considering the U.S. Army spent more than $200 million in Alaska to address a mental health crisis that it identified in 2019, according to USA TODAY.

“The 2021 suicide toll among the roughly 11,500 soldiers stationed there already has nearly matched last year when seven soldiers died by suicide while stationed with U.S. Army Alaska, whose principal posts are Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage,” the newspaper wrote.

In a survey of 4,000 soldiers, 10.8 percent had had suicidal ideas, according to the newspaper. That’s four times the general U.S. rate of suicide.

The survey also found that soldiers at Fort Wainwright report having trouble sleeping, worry about being able to buy high-quality food to eat, worried about finances, and a third of the soldiers said their leaders tolerate hazardous drinking while the soldiers are off duty.

 Alaska had the second highest suicide rate in the nation in 2019. But the Army was seeing problems with a cluster of slides at Fort Wainwright from 2014 and 2019.

Read more at USA TODAY.