There you have it. Lauren “Bobo” Boebert (R-CO) switched congressional districts with her carpet bag packed with a tattered personal history and managed to beat four opponents and win the 2024 District 4 Republican primary in Colorado. She left her western slope district where things were looking grim and scampered across the mountains to eastern Colorado where she found primary victory.
Source: Wikipedia. Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District. Where Bobo bailed.
Source: Wikipedia. Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. Where Bobo parachuted in.
Bobo is popular especially with the angry rural white conservative bunch which can be found everywhere to some extent. On a recent trip through the desolate Paradox Valley passing through the town of Bedrock in western Colorado we saw multiple Boebert campaign signs crammed in the scrub brush. Her spirit even lurks in Bedrock.
Lauren’s conservative fundamentalism and support for Trump appeals to a great many. You can protest to a supporter that she is crude, somewhat dense, and harbors appalling political beliefs. But it matters not to her supporters because she is one of Trump’s more aggressive attack dogs, and that is a virtue to them.
Formerly a swing state, Colorado has been electing Democrat state representatives since 2008 and presently has 5 out of 8 members of the US house and two Democrats in the senate. Conservatives are more predominant in the east and west thirds of the state and Democrats are concentrated along the I-25 urban corridor from Ft. Collins south to Pueblo. An exception to this liberal corridor is Colorado Springs, located an hour south of Denver. It is known for its large and politically influential evangelical conservative community.
Colorado Springs is also the home of James Dobson’s Focus on the Family fundamentalist protestant organization as well as many, many others. According to the Cause IQ website, there are 623 Christian non-profit organizations in the Springs with 8,150 employees, revenues of $804,278,628, and with assets totaling $777,104,922. Protestant fundamentalism is big business. By contrast, Catholic non-profit organizations only number at 13 with $5,003,712 in revenues.
These conservatives can be reliably counted on for wanting to convert the country into an authoritarian theocratic state if given the chance. The USA started as an effort to separate itself from a theocratic monarchy in the Revolutionary War and now finds itself full of people who want a protestant authoritarian theocracy. Really dumb.
Here is a truly naïve question: What is wrong with Russia? Why can’t Russian leaders focus on their own damned affairs rather than conquest or their clandestine efforts to destabilize other governments? From the western side of the globe this seems like a fair question. Are their lessons from history so scrambled that they have not learned some basic axioms of humane civilization? What happened to them? Why the perpetual paranoia, brutishness and authoritarianism?
It is important to separate “Kremlin” from “Russian people”. The Kremlin is a Moscow-based institution presided over by Russia’s national leadership. The Russian people are those working citizens distant from the Kremlin. Naturally, the Kremlin purports to represent the interests of the Russian people. Many say that the Kremlin represents an oligarchy inside and outside of the government. Most would say that Russia’s tradition of bribery and graft is rampant and even a built-in feature and not a bug. Whatever the case, it seems clear from the news that Russia’s military/industrial complex is riddled to the core with corruption.
The USSR and later Russia claim that they are threatened by Western adventurism and interference in their sovereign affairs. The lengthy Cold War between NATO and the Kremlin was largely about the spread of Soviet socialism and undesired political alignments between factions. Western countries were busy in the post-WWII years waging proxy battles and clandestine buggery with client states of the USSR and China. For our part, America didn’t do so well. In contrast with the Allied victory in Europe and Japan in WWII, the US had to sign an armistice with North Kores, a peace accord with North Viet Nam with the lightning-fast collapse of South Viet Nam, followed by the clumsy hijinks leading to the Iran-Contra scandal in the 80’s.
Kremlin policy would seem to be that “interfering in Russian Affairs” includes materiel support for emerging democracies around the world. This “interference” is justification for the incessant brinksmanship and covert meddling issuing from the Kremlin.
The US and coalition forces successfully routed the Iraqis in Kuwait in 1990 with the start of what became Gulf War I. After liberating Kuwait, US President George H.W. Bush invaded the Republic of Iraq destroying a good bit of their military but left Saddam Hussein in power. By 2003 George H.W.’s son, President George W. Bush, oversaw a clearly bogus campaign to take down Saddam right after the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. The smoke and mirrors show put on by the Bush administration conflating al Queda in Afghanistan with imaginary Iraqi weapons of mass destruction led to Saddam being quickly toppled and captured while hidden is a hole in the ground, tried and finally hung by his own people.
What the US-led coalition failed to appreciate was that Saddam held together Iraq by brute force and murder. Coalition forces swooped in and shut down his government without any thought as to the pragmatics of who will run the country the next day. There was the intent of giving birth to democracy with elections, but the power vacuum created by the toppling of Saddam and the dissolution of his government gave opportunity to numerous factions who jumped at it. This was the Iraqi insurgency which lasted until the US withdrawal in 2011.
US interventionism aimed at regime change by force or by covert efforts to remove certain leaders has a spotty record. Chili, Cuba and Nicaragua for example. The point is that US leaders have badly botched many schemes to cultivate governments friendly to US ambitions.
The first thing to remember is that we Americans view Russia through the smudged lens of our own popular culture and history. Over the decades since the end of WWII our self-appraisal of our many merits has swollen and become distended. The MAGA crowd seems to think there was a period of time when America was “Great”. I’d like to know when this happened. I’ve never heard MAGA people cite a particular time when this greatness occurred. Maybe they are thinking of the outcome of WWII and the succeeding few years. Perhaps it was their senior year of high school or during the summer break after third grade. When people?
As I survey American history as an amateur historian I have yet to find a halcyon period in America when peace and calm enveloped the land and all was well. With magnification, history is very granular and every year is a braided stream of tragedies, scoundrels and bad luck with the occasional patches of wonder and joy somewhere for a few. Well, perhaps this is all we can expect. Maybe the world really is a grubby place occupied mostly by people who are often nice, and with more than a few crackpots and psychopaths sprinkled here and there to round out the bell curve.
To be sure, we Americans have done a great deal to advance civilization overall in many ways. This has largely come through the allocation of funds in a resource-rich continent through capitalism, taxes and primed with incentivizing programs from the government after the New Deal. While necessity is the mother of invention, who can actually organize and monetize this necessity by asking for competitive bids on a moon project? A government can. Rather than “trickle-down” economics, this is pumped-down economics, and it works.What do the wealthy do with their tax savings? Trickle it down? Hardly, though some may allocate a bit of trickle-down money in venture capital firms, but that’s risky. Better to invest in solid assets like beachfront property in Florida.
The land that we call Russia, apart from the Siberian reaches of eastern Russia, has been home to many diverse peoples. One Wikipedia reference cites the beginning of Russia in the north with the Eastern Slavs in 862 CE and ruled by Viking conquerors. On this timeline, it is clear that people in the region have been in war, civil conflict or crushing poverty and authoritarianism almost continuously since then. The baseline condition of a great many people of Russia and nearby lands was the grinding poverty of serfdom and were only emancipated in 1861 by Tsar Alexander II. There have been invasions by the Mongols, Ottomans, Swedes, Napolean, Hitler, uprisings and fratricidal infighting for power. It is hard to know what occupants of the Moscow Kremlin are thinking. Russia seems destined to be ruled by an iron fist.
Unlike the English-speaking peoples, Russia never had a Magna Carta in their past outlining agreed upon limits to the power of the monarch. The very notion of wider participation in the conduct of government affairs was unknown. Democratic virtues taken for granted by western states never took hold in Russia. There was initially some hope for democracy after the fall of the Soviet Union by some, but there were no institutional and legal structures in place from which to operate a democratic republic. Worse yet, people were unemployed en masse and became frustrated by the lack of a “freedom dividend” and eventually there was support for a strongman leader. The collapse of the USSR left a power vacuum waiting to be filled. Yeltsin proved to be the wrong guy to inherit the reigns of power from the collapsed Soviet Politburo. He was widely seen as a drunken fool.
Russia had no history of conducting private business within the umbrella of international business law and capitalistic norms. What business law and intellectual property protection there may have been was from the Soviet era. Instead, there was a scramble to acquire the big industrial and financial pieces left over from the old USSR.
I’ve not found anything in the history of Russia that may have been a home-grown template for constructing a workable version of democracy. Russia’s long geographic and cultural isolation from the West doesn’t seem to have helped with the migration of what we might call the norms of democratic society. To be sure, Tsar Peter I (Peter the Great) had spent time in England and learned a great deal about shipbuilding and navigation, eventually leading to the formation of the Russian Baltic Fleet. King William III of England welcomed Peter because of the potential for trade with Russia.
The Soviets were successful in adopting some Western technologies and just enough consumerism to placate their population … partly. Unlike Western Europe, the USA, Canada and even Mexico who continue to be inundated by migrants wanting to get in, the USSR, on the other hand, had to contend with its citizens trying to escape. This is still a problem today in Russia. People vote with their feet.
Back to the initial question. Why can’t Vlad play nice? We can only guess. He is not burdened with a national history of a capitalistic democratic republic or with utopian visions of a liberal democratic society bursting with opportunities for everyone. Vlad is a product of his upbringing as a KGB officer in a closed and isolated security state with a population long accustomed to going along with what the central authoritarian leadership forcibly requires. As a former KGB operative in East Germany, he understands authoritarian rule at the ground level. While bubbling up the chain of command he mastered the complex internal Kremlin politics and managed to get selected by Yeltsin to succeed him. Lucky guy. But when will he decide enough is enough? Today, his poorly conceived plan to expand Russian influence by overtaking Ukraine has backfired, leading to over 500,000 Russian military casualties. Along with the loss of a large fraction of his conventional military armaments like tanks, cannon, radar, air defense systems, aircraft, naval vessels and so on, he has singlehandedly exposed the Russian military for what it is- a paper tiger, but only in conventional arms. He still has a potent nuclear triad to serve as his final stinger.
In the US, it’s common to enhance one’s home with greenery, notably a grass lawn. However, a lawn requires ongoing attention. I have a lawn care service fertilize and treat our lawn with herbicides throughout the growing season. Recently, I’ve scrutinized the herbicides they use. They used prodiamine and dicamba.
Hold on a minute. Wasn’t the 2020 registration of dicamba nullified recently in federal court? Yes, it was. Why has it been sprayed on my lawn? The ruling applies to the use of dicamba on soybean and cotton crops that have been genetically modified to be resistant to it. The high volatility of dicamba has been quite deleterious to crops in adjacent farmland and to plants that are pollinated by bees because of drift resulting in crop losses and sharp decrease in honey production. Dicamba is a broadleaf herbicide, though not effective against grasses.
A Brief Meteorological Interlude
Nature continually directs hostility towards our lawns and gardens, both from above and the sides. Living in a semi-arid climate with only 14 inches of annual moisture, the lack of precipitation is immediately detrimental. The desiccating rays from the sun, located only 8 light minutes away, evaporate vital moisture from plants and soil. Compounding the problem, dehydrating winds whisk away the moisture cooking off the soil. Since moist air is more buoyant than dry air, it rises and is carried away by convection into the prevailing winds.
At higher elevations, the combination of increased moisture and decreased temperature can lead to cloud formation. Moisture ascending from the ground combines with the air above. The lower temperatures at these heights cause the moisture to transition from a gaseous to a liquid state, resulting in clouds. This change, although it appears innocent, has thermal consequences. For humidity to condense into liquid, the surrounding air temperature, which reveals “sensible” heat, must be low enough to absorb the “insensible” or latent heat released during condensation without causing a significant rise in temperature. If not, an increase in temperature would hasten the shift from condensation back to evaporation. There is a delicate equilibrium in this phase transition.
As latent heat is released, the air’s density decreases, enhancing its buoyancy and causing it to rise further. The ascending misty air cools, allowing more moisture to condense, which adds to the cloud’s mass. But wait, there’s more—
A rising air parcel causes the surrounding air to be drawn inward from below towards the ascending convective column. Consequently, a significant volume of air may be uplifted, enhancing the moisture levels above the ground contributing to the formation of a convective cumulus cloud. Latent heat supplies part of the energy needed for the vertical ascent of air. This cycle persists until a net downward movement of rain occurs, pulling down cooler air from higher altitudes. The cessation of upward momentum in cloud formation leads to a rapid downward surge of air with the rain, which, upon reaching the ground, spreads out horizontally, occasionally at high speeds. This explains why cool gusts of wind often signal the approach of a rainstorm.
Prodiamine
On to Prodiamine and Dicamba. These two herbicides provide broad coverage by virtue of different biochemical mechanisms. Dicamba is a selective postemergent broadleafsystemic herbicide.
Prodiamine is a pre-emergent herbicide effective on crabgrass and annual blue grass, goosegrass, spurge, chickweed. A pre-emergent herbicide like prodiamine is injected into the soil where it binds to soil particles. A close analog called Trifluralin, prodiamine without the NH2 group, has been shown to have sufficient volatility that sufficient vapor can penetrate root tissue where it expresses its activity.
Source: Jinyi Chen, Qin Yu, Eric Patterson,Chad Sayer, Stephen Powles,” Dinitroaniline Herbicide Resistance and Mechanisms in Weeds”, Front. Plant Sci.,Sec. Crop and Product Physiology, 24 March 2021 Volume 12 – 2021 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.634018.
Prodiamine was invented by Sandoz and went to market in 1987. In 1996 Sandoz merged with Ciba-Geigy to form Novartis. In 2000 Novartis spun out its agrochemicals and genetically modified crops business and with AstraZeneca formed Syngenta, which is now part of the Syngenta Group, purchased by Sinochem in 2017.
Graphic: By Sam Scratch. A series of Dinitroaniline root inhibitors.
Comments on Patenting of Chemicals
When a biologically active substance is discovered, usually is the case that particular features and the shape of the molecule are crucial to the activity. Not just attachments but also the spatial relationship between them. The subject molecule is likely to be active in interacting with a pocket on an enzyme. That pocket has a particular 3-D shape that the molecule has to fit. Not only that, but the enzyme pocket is likely to have protein amino acid groups that have an affinity for charged or water insoluble features on the incoming molecule.
Looking at the prodiamine structure and analogs above, we can see that all of the analogs share certain features: two Nitro groups, -NO2; 1 Aniline nitrogen group with one or two hydrocarbons attached, -N(hydrocarbon)2 groups; a single 6-member hexagon ring (a benzene ring) from which to hang all of the appendages. Opposite to the top aniline nitrogen is an attachment present which 4 of the 6 analogs have: a -CF3 (trifluoromethyl) group attached. This doesn’t happen by accident- someone decided that it should be there because something useful happens with it there. A -CF3 group acts to pull electrons in the ring to lean in that direction, affecting how the electron charge is distributed on the whole molecule. Another analog has a -S(=O)2-NH2 group. This thing, called a sulfonamide group, also pulls ring electrons towards it. Why -CF3 versus -S(=O)2-NH2? Perhaps one is more potent or selective than the other or possibly because one was claimed in a patent and at the time the other was not. Either one could be a me-too herbicide. Analogs of a basic motif arise frequently in a competitive marketplace.
Often times, when a new and successful motif of pharmaceutical or agrochemical comes along, the race begins for competitors to develop close analogs, though being careful not to infringe on any patents. With chemical patents the composition of matter can be claimed, the method for making the substance as well as the method of use. Composition of matter, method of manufacture and use claims are often split into separate patents for IP safety in case one patent gets knocked down. What’s more, a composition of matter patent can be written so as to claim a vast number of analogs to broaden the IP real estate. This is called a Markush claim where a variable letter substitutes for a large or small set of chemical groups. A single structural framework can have many Markush groups giving rise to an astronomically large set of claimed combinations. Some companies, hide the composition of the best analogs in the Markush claims so as to minimize competitive intelligence losses to competitors.
Dicamba
A weed is a valueless plant growing wild that is in competition with a desired crop. The three major morphological categories are: grasses, sedges, and broadleaf weeds. A weed represents lost soil fertility.
Dicamba is a member of the benzoic acid subgroup of the aromatic carboxylic acid group of herbicides. This group of compounds are synthetic auxins, or plant hormones, that interfere with plant growth.
Source: Robin Mesnage, Michael Antoniou, “6 – Mammalian toxicity of herbicides used in intensive GM crop farming”, Herbicides: Chemistry, Efficacy, Toxicology, and Environmental Impacts, Emerging Issues in Analytical Chemistry, 2021, Pages 143-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823674-1.00007-9.
Other popular herbicides
Other carboxylic acid herbicides besides dicamba are the 2,4-D analogs.
Graphics: Sam Scratch. The much-dreaded toxicant dioxin (TCDD) was a side product in the manufacture of the herbicide 2,4,5-T. When 2,4,5-T was blended with 2,4-D to make agent orange, the dioxin came along.
Of the numerous forms of the dioxins, the species that is often discussed is the 2,3,7,8-TCDD version. The positions and number of chlorine atoms varies. The mechanism above shows the dioxin analog coming from 2,4,5-T. The 3-ring structure of TCDD is the dioxin core structure.
Graphics: Sam Scratch. How dioxin was formed in the 2,4,5-T process. The chemical mechanism begins with the displacement of 1 chlorine atom of the 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene by a hydroxide anion turning the tetrachoro ring into 2,4,5-trichlorophenol. In the presence of NaOH, the phenol turns into a phenolate which attacks the chloroacetic acid to form 2,4,5-T. However, a competing reaction involving the trichlorophenolate attacking another molecule of itself over a few steps can lead to the cyclization of the trichlorophenolate to the 2,3,7,8-TCDD. The displacement of a ring chlorine is somewhat slower than the displacement of a chlorine from acetic acid, so dioxin formation would be a minor side product.
2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, similar to dicamba in mechanism, that causes uncontrolled and unsustainable cell growth. The herbicide is absorbed through the leaves and is moved to the meristem where uncontrolled cell growth follows.
The news today from Faux News is that picayune Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., wants to rename the Exclusive Economic Zone after Donald J. Trump. All 4,383,000 square miles of it. He proposes to call it the “Donald John Trump Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States.” The EEZ extends out 200 miles offshore around the entirety of the US and possessions.
According to Mirriam Webster-
picayune • \pik-ee-YOON\ • adjective. : of little value : paltry; also : petty, small-minded.
This is after the earlier attempt to rename Washington-Dulles Airport after the orange felon. The brainwave behind this was Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Pa., the House GOP’s chief deputy whip. This was supported by Reps. Michael Waltz, R-Fla.; Andy Ogles, R-Tenn.; Chuck Fleischmann, R-Tenn.; Paul Gosar, R-Ariz.; Barry Moore, R-Ala.; and Troy Nehls, R-Texas.
Do we actually have to say it? How can this be any more than open groveling for favor by orthodox MAGA-mites at the top of the pyramid holding up an offering to the Orange Sun God. Could it actually be more pathetic?
Congressional Republican Mandarins pleading before the Orange Sun God for a bountiful election.
Here is a link to an article reporting on comments made by Wael Sawan, CEO of oil major Shell plc. He stated that Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law and Inflation Reduction Act “seem to be working in terms of attracting a significant amount of capital in different states, whether it’s a red or blue state,” at a meeting of the centrist Center for Strategic and International Studies.
It wasn’t all sweetness and light. He was critical of the Biden administration for its decision to pause new LNG export permits pending a thorough review of climate impacts. Sawan explained his view-
“I think sometimes the disagreement stems from the fact that it is a fossil fuel, therefore it cannot be clean. There is an almost absolutist perspective on this that some have” in parts of Washington and some European capitals, he said. “While I respect that view, the reality is it is an energy transition. And we need to be able to transition to lower-carbon solutions.”
I have to agree with his comment. Given the colossal size of the global oil & gas (O&G) industry and the extensive reach of our reliance on petroleum fuels and chemical products like plastics, there must be a transition shallow enough to evolve into renewables without crashing the global economy and the political upset that will come from that. The path to renewables has to start sometime, but maybe there should be some negotiation on the LNG export permits, if there already hasn’t been any. Sawan’s comments on this were valuable.
The matter of climate change is pressing and the motivation to change rapidly is irresistible to many. But it took many decades to get into this mess and it looks like it will take some time to ameliorate it. In the meantime, we the public can alter our consumption and driving habits en masse and make real change faster than government policy.
Kudos to Boeing and NASA for the triumphant launch of the Starliner aboard an Atlas V rocket, carrying astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams. The duo is tasked with delivering vital cargo to the space station, including a replacement pump for the malfunctioning urine processor that’s part of the water recovery system. With a seven-member crew on the station, one can envision the quick accumulation of urine. Let’s hope they were well-stocked with zip-lock bags.
Crewed space vehicles must rise to extra design requirements and certification steps over uncrewed launch systems. A crewed vehicle must be highly reliable with redundant systems and levels of control that the crew can take charge of to qualify for a human rating. According to NASA protocol requirements, to qualify under NASA CCP human-rating standard, the probability of a loss ascent and loss on descent should be no greater than 1 in 500 each way. The overall mission risk of loss, including on orbit, must not exceed 1 in 270.
The program shall be designed so that the cumulative probability of safe crew return over the life of the program exceeds 0.99. This will be accomplished through the use of all available mechanisms including mission success, abort, safe haven, and crew escape. Source: NASAs Human Rating Requirements.
The development of a human-rated space launch system that intends to use equipment and systems that have not been previously flight tested has a tough row to hoe. Entire buildings of cold, skeptical eyes will insist on being satisfied before any new system goes to launch. But this is true for the aerospace industry and the FAA in general. Software driven systems present challenges to software designers to get past a validation.
The string of crashes, delays and failures that Boeing has endured in the last few years is certainly noteworthy. Some have lamented that the company culture has drifted away from its earlier strong engineering culture to something else. Perhaps drifting MBA curricula and B-school faculty & consultant enthusiasms have contributed to some kind of inflection point in the thinking of the present C-suite inhabitants. Whatever the case, Boeing had better get its Mojo back.
ISS water and urine recycling system. Wait, shouldn’t there be a curtain for privacy?
The top-tier scientific journal Nature published on June 5, 2024, a research paper on the effects of Twitter de-platforming 70,000 accounts providing fake news. Unfortunately for many (most?) of us, online access to Nature is behind a paywall.
I won’t waste time on an analysis of someone else’s brief analysis of the hidden Nature article “Post-January 6th deplatforming reduced the reach of misinformation on Twitter.” Am I too miserly for not paying for a Nature article or a subscription? Yes, I am. I will include a link here to a brief online review article at TechPolicy.press for the readers consideration.
“The report makes clear that the authors could not reliably identify the magnitude of the observed effects due to the complexity of the events surrounding the insurrection and the volume of the news reporting on it, and that the results may not be generalizable to other platforms or events. But while Twitter normally “benefitted enormously from Trump’s volatile tweets” by keeping the platform “at the center of public discourse,” they say, the events at the US Capitol marked a moment of crisis for the company. “January 6th is a moment that highlights the relationship between real-world violence and misinformation, as well as the attempt at purposeful control over political speech on Twitter by its leadership,” the paper reads. In th [sic] moment of crisis, perhaps the bluntest of content moderation tools appears to have had the intended effect.” Source: TechPolicy.Press [Emphasis mine]
Instead of relying on words and handwaving, the authors of the Nature paper above used actual Twitter data from 500,000 users over June 2020 to February 2021 to extract trends about the very complex behavior surrounding the Jan 6th, 2021, event. Again, from the TechPolicy.press article …
“To answer these questions, the researchers used data acquired during the two most recent US election cycles to compare the misinformation sharing rates on Twitter. The 2020 election share rate among all Twitter users was five times higher than in the 2016 elections, and about twice as high among misinformation sharers. Following the November 2020 elections, and up until January 6th, the rates of misinformation remained “relatively high,” which is in direct contrast with the 2016 elections, where misinformation “declined immediately following Trump’s victory.” These results suggest “a marked change in the misinformation ecosystem on Twitter over time,” according to the paper.” Source: TechPolicy.Press [Emphasis mine]
It is interesting how the “misinformation declined immediately following Trump’s victory.” Golly, why would that be?
Lamentations on Chemistry 