Just the facts, Ma'am.

I'm not sure what the deal is here with DP on going after me, Candy and Ann_C other than it's nothing more than another witch hunt over a difference of opinions under the guise of "facts" and which people have more "credibility" (note the underline bold throughout): 

On one hand, we have Amy Cohen Efron, a deaf ASL user who has a Master’s degree and works solely in the Deaf Community. We have MishkaZena, a formerly oral deaf person who now uses ASL fluently. She holds two Master’s degrees and has worked extensively in the Deaf Community. And you have me – a native ASL deaf user, who has a bachelor of science degree and has worked/volunteered extensively in the Deaf Community. All of us three have done some form of scholarly research on the Deaf Community. We’ve read books, professional journal articles, attended classes and professional workshops focusing on various issues in the Deaf Community. We participate and subscribe to an email list serv for deaf academics. And it is very easy to find out MishkaZena and my real names – our real identities are not a secret.

On the other hand, we have Mike M, Ann_C and Candy. Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.

Mike M is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.

And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.

The questions now for all of you to consider are – who do you hold as being more credible on the Deaf Community issues? Whose ideas will you primarily draw from, so you can then help obtain what’s in the best interests for the Deaf Community? Which ideas will you hold as being credible?

What I see here appears to be an attempt to try and out individuals like Ann_C and others under the guise of "just the facts, ma'am" under a topic of who is "more credible." Incredible! All this reminds me like the time when Candy was exposed last year when her real name was revealed which resulted in people who didn't like her contacted her employer in the effort to try and get her into trouble because of a difference of opinions over her blogs fearing the boogeyman was out to destroy their ideology on Deaf culture. Ironically, in Candy's blog she wrote last year "A bully responds to Anti-Bullying Effort!" you can read what DP wrote in the comment section (note the bold):

People need to start filing reports with the police for harassment about these trying to get them fired for no good reason.

It’s one thing to complain about public servants behaving badly, but trying to out private citizens who blog anonymously, then trying to get them fired from their jobs, is just wrong.

Yet in DP's blog she goes after Ann_C, who is a private citizen, and attempted to identify her as much as possible and said,

Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.

All this has a writing of a dressing down in the effort to compartmentalize each of us into bite size pieces in the attempt to identify who we are and what we have done or not done and whether we fit into their ideological mold. Despite Ann_C's unknown status of who she is (which is not at all important nor necessary to know except by insecure people) as a blogger what DP just did reminded me of time when Ann_C and White Ghost (a frequent commenter) who were once threatened to be outed someday by a commenter in Ann_C's own blog. All this undermining efforts just because of a difference in opinions.

Last year Ann_C wrote "A Moral Compass" where she astutely observed:

V/bloggers, commenters, and readers alike all have seen this monster rear its ugly head online. And it’s an ugly head, no matter what shape it takes on: online personal attacks, cyber-harassment, hijacking of a thread, email threats, organizational bullying, online outting of a v/blogger’s real name, letters written to one’s employer, frivolous lawsuits, real-life threats/stalking, physical confrontations, ad nauseam.

Is it because of the target’s opinion/ view? No, it’s because the attacker dropped his moral compass in the angry desire to hit back at the person he disagreed with.

Pretty ironic considering what has just transpired today. And then you have DP who run by that familiar line again on Candy as someone who is "very little known."

And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.

Excuse me, her name was revealed last year thanks to zealous overbearing morons. But remember, it's "just the fact's, ma'am" when DP said:

All I did was to present facts here, then let the readers draw their own conclusions. If you interpret that as arrogant… well. So be it.

Facts? Or is this really an attempt to undermine and out individuals just because you disagree with their opinions like on what Ann_C opined in Amy Cohen's blog? It's one thing to disagree and state your arguments but it's entirely another thing to try and do this whole dressing down business that has an air of trying to out people of their full identities, and in a tone that would encourage other readers to try do more of the dirty work to do more of the outing business.

And then you have me that DP went after and it was a bit bizarre read, too.

Mike M. is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.

For the record, as I have said before in my blogs, I have a B.A. degree in Math from Gallaudet University and a M.S. degree in Geology from University of Idaho. I even got accepted for a PhD study at University of Maryland, too, along with a $5000 NASA  grant with the help of Gallaudet University. Yet I chose a better route than to get a PhD and that was time to start having a career. What's really bizarre is when DP wrote about having too much education claiming I said something like that.

"......even wrote once on his blog that he thought there was something such as too much education." 

Too much education of what? What the heck is that supposed to mean?  What a bunch of rambling nonsense here that doesn't make an ounce of sense. I've always held the philosophy that in life one never stop learning.  And what does it matter on whether I've read any scholarly books or journals about the Deaf community has to do with any of this? Maybe you missed this one?

DP has an opinion about credibility. Her views are her own and not representative of every single person in the Deaf community. People do have valid opinions regarding the Deaf community and such. Heck, I am a representative Gallaudet University. I represent Gallaudet University since I graduated from Gallaudet University. Nothing can take that away from me. If I opine that's not popular or agreeable by other people then that's not really my problem. But it does become a problem when people who disagree with people they don't like and get into this outing business. It simply gets way too personal. And from the looks of things, DP decided to hit back at three people whom she disagreed with in her blog using "just the facts, ma'am" bunk defense in the attempt to out people.

Not cool.

Addendum:  For those who say she doesn't "out" people, well, I beg to differ.

Allegedly?  It's been over a year since she was outed.

Addendum II on what Ann_C said:

I would have been glad to offer my view had DP's post not gone into a witch-hunt but instead asked me directly what I meant. She did get to it finally in a comment after a barbed exchange, but by that time, she'd already written me off. *shrug*

I was expressing the opinion that the video was pandering to deaf issues, and I still stand by that. With the approaching holidays and ten ppl coming to my house, I didn't have time to write a lengthy explanation under ACE's blog.

Btw, pls do read Anony the Great's analysis of that PPT in Candy's Who Let Out the Signage Out blog. It reflected a great deal of what my response was to that PPT.

Have a good holiday.

Ann_C

Happy holidays, ya'll. Btw, PPT = powerpoint.

Addendum III: Ann_C wrote a rebuttal to DP in the comment section below where I am copying and pasting it here:

Since Deaf Pundit closed her comment section under her "A Matter of Credibility" blog and didn't publish my last three comments, I believe my unpublished comments should go on the record:

"Lol, in all the time I've been blogging/commenting online, I've never claimed to be an expert nor have I ever claimed to represent the whole deaf community.

OTOH, a person who claims to be a Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T does have the problem of credibility, because she professes to speak for all of the deaf community.

Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T-ise as "standard operating procedure"?

Ooooooh I'm SCARED-- *trembling hands in the air*
Run for them thar' hills, folks, the Deaf Inquisition is coming!!!!

*********snort*"

The asterisks ran off the first comment page without the word "snort". That's why I sent two more comments, trying to put in the word "snort", which finally showed up on the third comment, ok?

That's it.

Ann_C

And you know what DP said?

Ann_C… I read your last 3 (unpublished) comments and the only thing I have to say to you is that I truly do feel sorry for you.

That means technically Ann_C wrote only one comment while the other two were exactly the same except for the number of asterisks that were too long and she had to re-write it again. What DP said sure made it sound like Ann_C wrote three separate and different scathing comments or something like that.  *smh*

Signs or No Signs?

Ah, another one of those rounds of shocked outrage over....signs. No, not sign language or ASL but as in signage like stop signs, directional signs, billboard signs, advertising signs and so forth. The little outrage is just beginning to trickle over a video piece regarding the numerous "Hearing and Speech Center" (HSC) signage in various spots on the campus of Gallaudet University.

For those who don't know the Hearing and Speech Center is:

one of the largest of its kind in the DC area and provides a wide array of services to the Gallaudet community, their family members, and the local community. Services include: an Assistive Devices Center, audiologic evaluation, aural rehabilitation, cochlear implant services, hearing aid services, speech reading classes, and speech-language pathology services.

The Center is a full service, urban clinic that serve the Gallaudet University community and the greater Washington DC area. A full service commitment to all those communities whether deaf, hard of hearing, Deaf, or hearing.

You know what? I think having those signs in place as designed provide an important strategic outcome for the Deaf community. First, those signs help hearing parents of deaf/hh children find their way by directing them to the location of the Hearing and Speech Center for their appointments. You get new clients and patients all the time and many of them are not familiar with Gallaudet University campus layout. Those directional signs on campus help point the way. While parents with their kids wind their way through campus they would get to see a campus full of kids, students, staff, and professors signing as they make their way to the center. You have exposure right there. Imagine if Gallaudet University didn't have that full service Hearing and Speech Center? All those kids with hearing aids or cochlear implants would not ever step foot on the campus of Gallaudet University but instead it'd take place at another hearing and speech service elsewhere whose grounds and offices would probably be sterile of any signing exposure. Not only kids but adults who use Gallaudet's HSC would also be exposed to a signing community probably for the first time, too.

 Many of those directional signs are placed together with signs for buildings such as "The Field House," "Ely Center," "Gate House," and "Sorenson Language and Communication Center." All in all, I say at the end those directional signs are a way to help bring more exposure to deaf and hard of hearing kids (and their parents) and hearing people by helping to direct them through a campus full of signing people by making it friendly and inviting for those arriving on campus for the very first time. What better way to slowly introduce them to a signing community and culture?

Gallaudet University Google Earth from 1949 - 2010

Can you spot the changes?


Gif webcam

Robin Williams and Koko the Gorilla - video

Looks like Koko the Gorilla found a new playmate.

Gallaudet University's holiday video....no signing II

Looking back on what I wrote today about the recent holiday video that apparently upset a few people. It is a video produced by Gallaudet University that includes Dr. Hurwitz shown at the end of the video where he signed and used his voice (starting at the 16:44 mark). And then I remembered something. It was the International Congress on the Education of the Deaf's (ICED) statement about a "A New Era: Deaf Participation and Collaboration" where they issued a global call to "accept and respect all languages and all forms of communication" in the education of deaf people. ICED made sure that the message is to accept and respect all forms of communication be loud and clear. Nothing was said about which ones MUST be used but rather they all MUST be accepted and respected. All forms of communication need to be accepted and respected. That's what I saw in Gallaudet University's holiday video as well. That is what Dr. Hurwitz embraced.

Gallaudet University's holiday video....no signing

At the 3:54 minute mark in a Gallaudet University's video on how holidays are celebrated in different countries as explained by different people, Oluyinka "Yinka" Fakunle who is the part of the Communications and Public Relations Staff as an Administrative Secretary discusses her holiday tradition by talking and not sign. However, we don't know when she was hired or how long she was at Gallaudet University.



Gallaudet University's communication policy:

2.2 Policy Concerning Bilingualism
Gallaudet University is a bilingual, diverse, multicultural institution of higher education that ensures the intellectual and professional advancement of deaf and hard of hearing individuals through American Sign Language and English. Gallaudet University’s mission as a unique educational institution is inextricably bound to the need for direct, accessible communication among students and faculty. To that end, all members of the University Faculty are committed to promoting bilingual communication. The University is committed to providing training and resources, as needed, to support all members of the Faculty in developing the necessary language skills.

The video provides captioning and meets, as a minimum, Gallaudet University's policy guideline that the communication be direct, comprehensible and accessible. In Yinka's case hers is not a bilingual example. Secondly, the video is not in a classroom setting and those in the video volunteered to speak. Third, before ya'll get huffy, we don't know the circumstances or reason behind Yinka not signing in the video. We don't even know how long she's been at Gallaudet University and may have been recently hired.  This has happened before when people got unnecessarily angry and ugly at a deaf professor who talked at a Gallaudet University's graduation commencement speech instead of signing. For the sake of fluidity and speed, and perhaps not enough signing skill to start with Yinka choose to speak instead. And lastly, Yinka should not in any way be reprimanded, retaliated against or scolded for speaking in that video.

For those who already accessed Yinka's email account and wrote nasty emails to her in response to the video, shame on you! If you're thinking about writing a nasty email to her, don't! The people in charge of the video-taping and editing choose to keep Yinka in that video as part of Gallaudet University's video on "How Does Gallaudet University Celebrate the Holidays?" Go talk to them first before going after Yinka. She should be given the widest latitude in this circumstance. Regardless of the outcome, the real question shouldn't be about Yinka's communication preference but the people who made that video. At least it was captioned and we all should be thankful for that. Nobody missed out on anything in that video.  And it doesn't hurt to show a bit of diversity, either....as long as communication access is readily available just like when I did my speech without signing in 2007 at Gallaudet University.

When bullies go after kids with cochlear implants

Here's a good story about a deaf boy who had to take a stand and defend himself against a bully. I'm not sure if it's because he was bullied because he wore a cochlear implant but in the end the deaf boy ultimately stood his ground.

There comes a point in all of our lives when we reach a limit and we are forced to defend ourselves. Bullies beware of a deaf child wearing a cochlear implant who will take no more shit.

I think many of us who wore hearing aids while growing up in regular or mainstreamed school were sometimes targeted because we were easily identified as a deaf/hh person. But for me growing up I never considered myself as being bullied because I always stood my ground and fought back. Only a couple instances happened in my life while as a kid I can remember clearly when I was in the 6th grade and 10th grade. I was never the one to back down if anybody ever thought I was easy picking. It helped that I had years of wrestling experience and have won tournaments. I had a great time going to regular school (4th thru 12 grade) and had a great many number of hearing friends while growing up. I played and competed in baseball, soccer, wrestling sports and school band competitions and made friends as well. I can't ever recall a bad time going to regular school starting in the 4th grade to 12th. The same goes for at a time when I went to a school with an oral program up to the 2nd grade at Birney School in Tacoma, and then entered a mainstreamed school at 3rd grade and eventually went to regular school starting in the 4th grade ever since.  I know others who have truly experienced bullying and were unable or didn't want to defend themselves had the brunt of it. But in my life, I don't dwell on constantly painting myself as a victim. In fact, I never saw myself as a victim at any stage of my life. As the old cliche goes, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. And by that convention you can certainly come out on top. 

Round Peg in a Square Hole - LOL MEME

To expand cartoon panel go here.

Enjoy. 

The most accessible stadium...evah!

I've said this over four years ago at Gallaudet University while giving my  speech presentation regarding technology and communication access in the future. I explained that technology will play a major role in how we will interact with anyone on and off campus. Today we continue to see this happening as communication access technology slowly unfold before us such as voice recognition smart phone to text feature. As for entertainment communication access here's a video of Kevin McGuire, an attorney and an ADA consultant, pointing out features accessible for all patrons with mobility, sight, and hearing impairments at Gillette Stadium. A positive example of how a business can become the most accessible business to wide ranging number of people.  This is a true example of how the use of technology and engineering combined can easily make accommodations a part of every day business and still be successful. Gillette Stadium is not just for baseball but certainly for football as well and for any other venue event.

New hearing aid style....punkish

I can't exactly say this is the kind of hearing aid people would desire for but I'd give them credit for being this creative. What you're seeing in this photo is a hearing aid. Yes. A hearing aid. Go here and learn more about this really strange idea of a hearing aid design.  If you're hard of hearing and are into this sort of punk-type of jewelry design for your ear...lobes....you might want to try this one out, if you can afford it. I imagine it'd be expensive considering not many would wear it in that fashion.

Unapproachable Deaf People?

Are deaf and hard of hearing people really that "unapproachable" simply because they have a different way of communicating? In some ways I'd say "yes" and in some ways I'd say "no." That would depend on the context of a situation. Let me give you one "unapproachable" example and that would be the Deafhood Foundation organization.  On the outside they look to be very "approachable" but at closer inspection one would began to realize they are quite the opposite. The foundation's mission is:

"....dedicated to achieving economic and social justice for all Deaf people." 

 Now, note the capital letter "D"eaf in their mission statement as they are attempting to convey that word to mean all people with hearing loss, deaf and hard of hearing. But the problem is that the term "Deaf" with the upper case "D" has always denoted to mean culturally deaf people. According to Carol Padden and Tom Humphries, in Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988) explains the meaning and difference between "D"eaf and "d"eaf:

We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture. The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society. We distinguish them from, for example, those who find themselves losing their hearing because of illness, trauma or age; although these people share the condition of not hearing, they do not have access to the knowledge, beliefs, and practices that make up the culture of Deaf people.

Some organizations even attempted to change that very definition by inserting "Deaf" into their own bylaws without giving any real definition to it and could easily be construed to mean only culturally deaf people. Over the last three decades Deaf (culturally deaf) people have made it a point that they "own" that word and for it to mean explicitly one thing, a group that uses ASL and have a culture. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But what is obvious here is that 98% of the deaf and hard of hearing population who do not know sign language, who are not affiliated with Deaf culture, and have other preferred means to communicate such as speaking, using Cued speech, listening and speaking, or preferring the use of Signing Exact English, for example. We still have an extremely large majority deaf and hard of hearing population that simply do not sign and they certainly are not "Deaf" people.

Deafhood Foundation is far from approachable because on their main web page it may look inviting except that their Gratitude video is only limited to those who know sign language which leaves the rest of  99.96% of the U.S. population out. So much for "social justice" when they've been demanding that "hearing people" ought to include captioning in their speaking videos. The irony is palpable here. With a signing video there is no way to approach the remaining U.S. audience if captioning isn't being used to convey their message. Not some social gabbing amongst Deaf people but a message they are trying to convey and put out for all to see.  Their own message largely resonates only to those within their own Deaf group rather than to the rest of the 98% of the population of people with hearing loss which numbers around 36,000,000 people. That's a lot of people to ignore when trying to put out a message of unity, acceptance and communication accessibility.


As for "approachable" deaf and hard of hearing people (i.e.. everybody with a hearing loss), they are increasingly using technology to allow themselves to become more approachable by giving them the ability to converse and interact with hearing people in a variety of ways.  Lately I have noticed that more and more deaf/hh people are using captioning technology to include with their own personal videos, this is true among a rising number of Deaf people taking advantage of that technology to spread their message to the rest of the English using U.S. population by using the captioned English language.  A good example of that (i.e. signing deaf) is Barry Sewell's latest video about John Yeh on conveying his message to the rest of the U.S. audience. Another approachable example would be the people who run HLAA whose own donation had already hit the million dollar mark last month since starting in January.

It's not just captioning technology but other technologies like face to face communication technology, and internet relay technology. Something that would allow the ability to interact easily with people and make them approachable. It's not about the competition of ideologies but about acceptance and understanding when it comes to accessible communication for all.

In the end the question becomes are you Frieda, the lovable, vain, unapproachable perhaps angry deaf person or are you one of those people who find a way to make themselves approachable as possible without the need to be so ungainly politically correct?

Gallaudet University's Quiet Climate Change - Part II

This is a second round to my previous blog as I have something else to add. For the longest time I supported the idea of having a robust discussion on climate science.  Because of a politically driven agenda behind the term "climate change" it has become irretrievably tainted as a code word for "anthropogenic global warming" (AGW) rather than as both cooling and warming climates that is part of Earth's natural climate variability.

For this part II blog piece I'd like to continue my discussion of Bill Snape's 2008 video presentation that was presented at Gallaudet University.  He covered the Arctic sea ice in the beginning and presented a graph that showed a downward trend based on 27 years worth of Arctic sea ice data at the 9:46 time mark. He used an Arctic sea ice before and after satellite pictures taken in 1979 and 2007. Funny thing is that he said "30 years later" at the 2 minute mark referring the time difference between the two pictures which should've been "28 years later." The two satellite pictures he presented showed a large expanse of Arctic sea ice in September of 1979 and contrasted that with a much smaller expanse of sea ice in September of 2007 under the heavy pretext that the change in ice expanse was due to man's supposed additional introduction of CO2 into the atmosphere.

At the time of Bill Snape's presentation he had only 28 years worth of continuous satellite imagery and not 50, 100, 200, 500 or 1000 years worth of sea ice expanse data to see the highest and lowest sea ice extent over a longer period of time. It was simply not possible because satellite technology did not exist at the time. We're only seeing a very small window of time spanning a mere 28 years. That's not enough to make any kind of conclusion other than it's all naturally caused rather than man-made (induced). And then he said the most irresponsible thing that any self-respecting scientists would not do and that is to make a factual statement based on a hypothesis using only 28 years worth of sea ice coverage data that the reason for less ice coverage was because of global warming. He didn't say anthropogenic-caused global warming (AGW) but the whole pretext of his presentation is on global warming as caused by human beings. There's no doubt about that one. To the unsuspecting audience watching Bill's presentation they were most likely not aware that 28 years of data do no equate as an irrefutable proof that AGW is the reason when in reality it is much more complex than that with man's contribution hardly being the source.

Let's look at a time lapse video from 1978 to 2009 using that same Arctic sea ice data and you can see the continual contraction and expansion of sea ice over time.



Here's a video time lapse from 2000 to 2009 that's a bit more detailed and clearer.



In Bill Snape's presentation he showed a September 2007 satellite picture showing the Arctic sea ice at its lowest sea expanse. That was 4 years ago. Since then the expanse has not gotten any lower than 2007 if you look at the AMSR-E Sea Ice Extent graph (go here for an enlarged picture).

You can see that after 2007 none of the sea ice extent ever got lower than 2007. There's also NORSEX's graph to look at well.  With 33 years worth of Arctic sea ice data showed a slight downward trend and that's all it is, a downward trend with no idea of what that trend may have looked like prior to 1979 leading up to today. But we can see what it might have looked like prior to 1979 using other sources to gain a better idea.

Before 1969 six ships completed the Northwest Passage when it was ice free at the time. Earlier than that you had Roald Amundsen back in 1903 made his ice-free trip in the late summer month using his 70 foot long wooden fishing boat during his three year trip to find the "holy grail" Northwest Passage. That passage was ice free then when he discovered the route.  It was also ice free in the 1940s.

St. Roch had serviced RCMP posts and Inuit settlements in the western Arctic since 1928, but it is for her epic voyages through the Northwest Passage from west to east between 1940 and 1942, and the return voyage in 1944..

It certainly wasn't ice free some 13,000 years ago when we had glacial ice sheets that extended all the way to the northern parts of the United States (geographically speaking) before it began retreating as Earth gradually warmed up. That's an indisputable fact. Earth has warmed up since then with occasional mini ice ages.
You have historical, archaelogical, and biological examples and evidences so numerous they point to a very warm Medieval period from 1000 to 1300 AD. And that temperatures were estimated as high as 4 degrees Celsius warmer than today. Crops cultivated were done further north in Europe. Tree lines in the Alps were found to have grown 2000 meters higher than today's tree line elevation. Vikings were able to live on Greenland and even grow crops there before the cold climate returned and had to abandon their established settlements (this is true in the northern parts of Norway). Grapes were grown  for wine at one time as far north as southern Norway. Citrus fruits were once grown much further north in Asia than today. All point to a very warm period of time. All documented.

During the Holocene period studies have found trees that grew few hundred miles more north compared to today or that they found trees growing 1500 to 2400 feet higher in elevation in mountainous areas than today. All at a time when CO2 concentration was much, much lower, of course. Or go further back in time you had CO2 concentrations in the 1000 to 2000 ppm range where both plant and animal species thrived on land.

So, in retrospect, I have several concerns about Bill Snape's 2008 presentation to an audience that weren't exactly savvy in the field of science to understand enough the limitations of data and correlation exercises. The warming (and cooling) of Earth is not unprecedented. It has been doing that for hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years, even when you have had natural catastrophic events occur such as volcanic explosions and meteor impacts which created dramatic climatic changes on a global scale in a very short time span.

On a closer time scale we have retreating glaciers of Garibaldi Park in B.C., Canada (map) where retreating glaciers revealed several thousand year old preserved tree stumps with their roots still in the soil. Trees that were once part of an ancient forest. An indication of a time when it was much warmer you had mature forest growing in abundance. The Warren glacier (one of many glaciers in Garibaldi Park) began retreating from it's maximum extent in 1705 over a span of almost 300 years to 2003 with recent photographic evidence starting in 1912.

Glaciers in Garibaldi Park have retreated and advanced several times over the last several thousand years which may be in fact tied to solar activity as an important if not main climate forcing mechanism.

Periods of advance in Garibaldi Park are broadly synchronous with advances elsewhere in the Canadian Cordillera, suggesting a common climatic cause. The Garibaldi Park glacier record is also broadly synchronous with the record of Holocene sunspot numbers, supporting previous research that suggests solar activity may be an important climate forcing mechanism.

Bill Snape, do you know what's scarier? To have an audience that isn't savvy enough to understand the limitation of scientific data and correlation exercises, and who are more easily swayed with cute pictures of polar bears with one person presenting only one side of the story that's theoretical in nature. For example, if you want to talk about correlation then tell me which of the two graphs shows a better positive correlation with global temperature change on Earth.


Picture graphs of correlation of Arctic Temperatures With Solar Irradiance (above) and CO2 (bottom).

Those graphs came from a 2005 study on the effects of solar irradiance on Arctic temperatures (Soon, W.H., "Variable Solar Irradiance as a Plausible Agent for Multidecadal Variations in the Arctic-wide Surface Air Temperature Record of the Past 130 Years," Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, 2005) where you can see that there is a much stronger positive correlation between temperatures and solar irradiance than with increasing CO2 concentration over time.

So, where I'm getting at? Well, a lot of things. One is the feeding of scientific information based on a theory such as AGW as if they were factual science and that all scientists have come to a consensus on this (they haven't). It's true that the Arctic sea ice has expanded and contracted seasonally but with only 32 years worth of data we are limited by what we can surmise why a slight downward trend on sea ice extent other than to say it's all part of the natural variability of climate change. It's certainly better than to make a giant sweeping statement saying man has indirectly caused Arctic sea ice or glaciers to retreat all because of a theory and not fact.

Bottom line, Gallaudet University students and staff need to ask real honest and hard questions and not be afraid to raise their hands say, "Excuse me,...." and ask direct, challenging questions and the need for more clarification.

Gallaudet University's Quiet Climate Change

It all began some 4 to 5 years ago at the height of this well known climate fear rippling through the fabric of our easily-duped society ominously known as "Global Warming."  Gallaudet University soon became a part of this movement at the academic level where professors and students excitedly signed about this fearful awesomeness of thermagedon known as "Global Warming."  A term that has changed rather rapidly over the years to become known as "Climate Change" and then progress laughably to "Climate Disruption"......the equivalent of moving the goal post......all within the context of anthropogenic-caused global warming (AGW) even though Earth has not warmed up for 13 years since 1998.

This graph shows that the trend of the last decade is absolutely flat, with no increase at all – though the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have carried on rising relentlessly.

‘This is nowhere near what the climate models were predicting,’ Prof Curry said. ‘Whatever it is that’s going on here, it doesn’t look like it’s being dominated by CO2.’

Something that scientists are increasingly being pressed to admit that this is the case acknowledging global temperature has not risen in 13 years but still attempt to tweak their own reasoning behind the lack of temperature trend increase in favor of the direction of AGW. Such disingenuous attempts.

This "climate disruption" term was first proposed for use in 2010 to replace "climate change." Such a change designed to make it sound increasingly ominous because "climate change" wasn't doing enough to put fear into gullible, fertile public minds.  However, should a cataclysmic volcanic eruption occur, a la Pinatubo or worse Krakatoa, the slamming of a 1/4 mile wide iron-fused meteor into Earth or, god forbid, multiple nuclear warheads going off in different countries then by all means "Climate Disruption" would be appropriately termed for those instances because it would definitely disrupt our climate system in such a catastrophic manner.

The term "climate disruption" was designed in the context of "global warming" (though some scientists continue to deny it's about global warming but about rapid climate change) where human is supposedly the main reason for Earth to warm up (remember, no warming since 1998) rather than attribute to natural variability when humans ultimately have no control of.  Yet some people use even more ominous phrases like "avoid catastrophic climate disruption" like Bill Snape has done last year in May 2010 (fyi, he is the head swim coach at Gallaudet University). Now, it's catastrophic! Thermagedon! This "dangerous" carbon dioxide (CO2) gas in our atmosphere high above us even though CO2 makes up about 0.03% (0.0003) of the total atmospheric gases. The same gas that we exhale everyday. The same gas that green plants absorb it along with water to produce products through photosynthesis, sugar and oxygen, which leave the leaf. In short, we exhale the CO2 while plants absorb the CO2 to make Oxygen, a gas that we need to breath in order to live. But Bill Snape managed to mention "global warming" once, "climate change" twice, and "climate disruption" twice all in the same article he wrote last year.

At the height of Gallaudet University's global warming bandwagon which presumably peaked in 2007 when they made an announcement on joining with Focus the Nation organization in a newsletter (the Dec 17, 2007 newsletter is no longer publicly available except in the Google cache).

Gallaudet students know that climate change is happening every day, but they believe they can reverse the trend. Members of the new student organization Green Gallaudet have already taken a number of actions, from selling reusable shopping bags to becoming part of the effort to make campus buildings environmentally friendly. Now the group, which held its first meeting in September, is planning a marathon day of activities surrounding climate change. Along with over 1,000 other schools and organizations nationwide, Gallaudet will host a Focus the Nation (FTN) teach-in on January 31, bringing dozens of experts to speak about climate change and how Americans can face this challenge.

The students’ concerns are founded in strong evidence. “The rate at which carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are rising is quite alarming,” said Green Gallaudet advisor Dr. Caroline Solomon, an associate professor of biology. She also points out that the increase is clearly tied to humans’ fossil fuel consumption. And it is just recently, during the lifetimes of today’s college students, that the problem has become more severe and garnered more attention. “The rise in global temperatures is having a greater impact than we could have possibly imagined ten years ago,” Dr. Solomon said.

Remember, global temperature has not risen since 1998. And certainly you have the problem of bad temperature data from bad temperature monitoring stations that skews global temperature data upward.

Gallaudet University quietly removed themselves from the Focus the Nation organization (no longer on their map) quickly jumping off of the bandwagon as you can tell below.

Focus the Nation prided themselves with their own apocalyptic prediction back in 2007 at the height of the global warming scare.

"Focus the Nation is exploding because, across the country, educators and students at every high school, college and university understand that we have just a few short years to act decisively to hold global warming to the low end of 3-4 degrees F."

Few short years? Oh my. Their past bleating prediction has now been replaced with a mission statement with no mention of climate change or global warming:

 A just and prosperous clean energy future

I've quietly observed the changes at Gallaudet University over the years when I noticed how they quietly jumped off the climate change bandwagon which probably began around 2009. Bill Snape probably made his last push to turn the tide at a global warming presentation at Gallaudet University signing and talking to students and staff in 2008 as seen in this video commenting on cute polar bears and such.  He also discussed polar bears in a May 2008 interview.

Protecting the Polar Bear

May 2, 2008

Protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act could force the government to take action on global warming and development in the Arctic. Host Bruce Gellerman talks with Bill Snape from the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs who sued the federal government to make a decision about the polar bear...

GELLERMAN: So what legal precedent, if any, does [this listing] set?

SNAPE: Well I think it's very significant that if the polar bear were to be listed, and I think eventually it will be listed, it will be the first major species to be listed as a result of global warming impacts. … Listings under the Endangered Species Act in general should follow a very logical, rational scientific process. It's the Bush administration that has convoluted that process as it relates to the polar bear, because global warming doesn't comport with their notion of truth...

GELLERMAN: So is this about the bears, or is this about prohibiting, you know, invasion of their habitat by oil drilling companies?

SNAPE: Well it's absolutely about the bears, because the bears are doing poorly biologically, but I think the polar bear really is the canary in the coal mine. You're seeing an Arctic ecosystem collapsing...

Polar bear as the canary in the coal mine? Even though polar bears have been around for hundreds of thousands of years even at a time when arctic ice wasn't around? Arctic ecosystem collapsing? What does that supposed to mean?   Polar bears do not always depend on ice for their livelihoods or survival despite their natural ability to swim hundreds of miles in a single swim.

And ignoring the fact that Arctic sea ice extent began its satellite photo size measurement beginning in 1979 which is a mere 30+ years worth of sea ice data of contraction and expansion against the backdrop when the Arctic ocean was ice free (here and here) during the Holocene (past ~11,000 years). Going back further they survived an even warmer period based on DNA from a 110,000–130,000-year-old polar-bear fossil that was successfully sequenced.  Polar bears were around during the Holocene period in abundance and survived man's hunting and changing climate condition which is believed to have caused the extinction of the Wooly Mammoth. Even today the population of polar bears continue to be stable or have increased over the last three or four decades and in no way appears to be endangered at all....certainly not from global warming, natural or otherwise.

Yet with the recent ruling in June 2011 that upheld the endangered species status for polar bears based on the assumption that the arctic ice (which floats on the Arctic ocean and not on land) is "melting away" (hardly the case as sea ice extent remains within the natural variability of ice contraction and expansion) due to anthropogenic global warming as being the main thrust and reason for the polar bears' endangered listing but in reality it's pure politics in play as commented by the Cato Institute.

This is a political, not a scientific act. Polar bears are at or near record population levels today. They clearly survived eras in the past where Arctic climate was warmer than it is now. For several millennia after the end of the last ice age, summer temperatures in the Eurasian Arctic were 4-13°F warmer than modern temperatures. As some summer sea-ice is lost at today's temperatures, it seems likely that it was probably absent during that era. Obviously the polar bear survived, as did the fledgling Inuit culture.

This marks the first instance of a species being listed based upon a computer model of future climate from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). There has been no net warming in the last decade, and scientists recently discovered that it is likely there will be little if any for the next decade. Not one of the IPCC's models includes a two-decade hiatus in global warming. Consequently this listing is based upon obsolete science. This makes the listing of the Polar Bear obviously political and hardly scientific.

I pointed out more than a few times in my blog and elsewhere that Earth's climate is an incredibly complex, not entirely a closed system, and dynamic system involving the atmosphere, land and water whose climate change is at the whim of our nearest star which is our sun. Occam's Razor, what has been obvious all along as theories go has always been in our sun-burned faces.  And with the latest round of Climategate 2.0 where a cache of more than 5,200 email correspondences were made available to the public a few days ago showed collusions between the media, politicians and scientists to promote AGW.  An attempt to purposely deny data to people and scientists and at the same time deny people who question the AGW any necessary media coverages.  This round of emails will certainly help squelch any unnecessary claims of anthropogenic global warming, or in the words of Bill Snape, "catastrophic climate disruption."

Be sure to read Part II.

Thank you for participating. 

Sign Write

The title "sign write" is as best as I can describe a situation and it has to do with an observation I noticed in a discussion forum on a deaf-related topic. There was a hearing parent (of a deaf child) who actually wrote somewhat haltingly in English as if it was done in a signing format. This hearing parent was a new member with English as the native language. So, it's not like it was a 2nd language or anything like that. I thought about using "deaf talk" but that's not right and does it reflect appropriately what I'm trying to get at here.  And so, "sign write" is as close as I can describe correctly this situation about a hearing parent. 

In later threads that parent wrote in a fashion that was grammatically smoother and stayed like that ever since. And so I have this question and I'm wondering about this. Has anyone ever witnessed anything like that before? A new hearing parent in a forum attended by mostly deaf and hard of hearing members to write English in an almost a haltingly manner like "sign write"?

I'm thinking that this parent had this misconception about the forum members' English fluency and thought it was necessary to write in such a way. Your thoughts?

A Day by Day Review

Gosh, it has nearly been 6 years since Chris Muir was inspired by my email to him about Rob McGovern and my cousin, Major Gregory Stone, who was murdered in a grenade tent attack in Kuwait days before the Iraq war to begin. The resulting inspiration of mine was incorporated into Chris Muir's Day by Day cartoon panel as seen above. That was a time early on in my blogging career when I was mostly writing political blogs more so than deaf related blogs.  Going back I can see my transition going from writing mostly politically themed blogs to deafness related blogs. In order to continue with my writing outlet in the area of politics I created Deaf Conservative Republicans blogsite back in November of 2008 with numerous deaf contributors who have contributed their blog pieces.

It's no secret that my blogging career spanned many different blogs that I've created over the years.  As always, my goal and aim were to reach both hearing and deaf readers covering a variety of interest. Other blogs I've created in the past were on my wildland fire fighting stories and pictures, strongman blog in preparation for my upcoming strongman competion, deaf aikido on martial art,  Ragtime Piano! blog, and a blog on a new soon-to-be-developed-one-of-a-kind commercial spaceport in New Mexico (my name is mentioned in a Wikipedia external link section about the spaceport) because of my interest on space and technology, and being so close to it when I lived in New Mexico for several years. BTW, the New Mexico Spaceport is still a few years away from completion.  Most of those blog lasted only a few years with the exception of my Kokonut Pundit and Ragtime Piano! blogs.  Even when hurricane Katrina hit the deaf/hh community hard I was there to try and help deaf/hh survivors find each other which yielded lots of email responses as a show of appreciation when I set up my Deaf Survivors blog. Michelle Malkin promptly recognized my call for help for deaf and hard of hearing survivors of hurricane Katrina. Even then I got criticized by a few Deaf people for having the audacity to help in time of disaster. Incredible boorish people they were.

Just making a day by day observations of my own blogging contribution Just like how the author of his Day by Day cartoon makes his daily observations about daily life full of ironies and hypocrisies. Take some time to visit his site.

Happy Veterans Day to all the U.S. veterans on 11-11-11! We're proud of you!

UPDATE: Got some interesting hits yesterday coming from NYTimes that linked to my Day by Day Review blog. I went and investigated and found my link in a recent NYTimes article.

Voting Illusion in DeafRead

In DeafRead's Extra section there is an opportunity for readers to vote on a blog piece they like. And with enough votes it could go to the main page of DR's aggregator page. I don't care much for votes but I noticed an usual pattern after my blog piece had gotten 2 or 3 votes in the beginning.  Another blog below mine in DR Extra suddenly went 2 or 3 votes higher over mine. Sensing that something is not right simply because Deaf Anthology is linked to a blog with a YouTube video containing no captions. The video contain words that were sung throughout the video. While mine was a fully dedicated Halloween blog.

I figured this was due to a bit of ego factored in only because my blog piece was above the Deaf Anthology's piece in DR Extra and seeing my number go up while Deaf Anthology's stayed behind. Then I started to see a pattern. I asked a few of my friends to vote for my blog piece and I let them know it was an experiment. It didn't take long until I was 1 or 2 votes higher than Anthology's. And it wasn't long also until the number of votes for Anthology to up 1 or 2 votes higher than mine. In no way did I touch or instruct my friends to vote for Deaf Anthology in case you're wondering.

I realized the inherent weakness when it comes to online voting. One person can easily go to Best Buy and go online using their laptop computer displays, or to a phone store with their display notebook laptops with an internet connection, a library computer room, at work, or at a college campus computer room and vote multiple times. Though I didn't go to those places except for my work. And if one has a smart phone with an internet connection, that same person can vote for the same blog article again. Not only that if you have a family then there are probably more laptops to access, including daughters' and/or sons' smart phones if they have one (mine do not).

After November 3rd (first picture at top) I let it alone for a week and saw no changes in votes. On Nov 10th with 16 vs 19 votes I decided to add three more votes (see middle picture) making it 19 vs 18 votes. It wasn't long until Athology's vote went up by three, too, with a vote of 19 vs 20 that same day. The next day Anthology's went up another two votes with 19 vs 22 votes just for good measure I suppose. 

Now, I'm letting people and Tayler Mayer know this because voting can be done multiple times by one person on his/her own blog in DR Extra. I've done this myself along with the help of my friends' help. No big secret or shame in telling you people this. My intention was not to embarrass Tayler Mayer about this. Granted, DR's online voting is not perfect and I realize that. I'm sure Tayler Mayer is already very aware of this shortcoming and realize the possibility of deceitful voting practices in DeafRead Extra.

And, yeah, this is a slow news day for me.

But happy Veterans Day! Thank you for all you have done.


Update: As soon as I blogged this I saw that Deaf Anthology's number of votes jumped up to 23. Congratulations!

UPDATE II: Poor guy, he's deflecting using a fantasy rebuttal. Tsk.

Walk4Hearing reaches pivotal fund raising goal

It took 10 months starting in January of this year the Walk4Hearing to finally reach their fund raising goal of $1.2 million dollars in record time. Money raised will be used toward resources for deaf and hard of hearing people. And why so quickly did it raise so much money in such a relatively short time? Simple. There was no politics mucking things up. No political correctness games. No secret agenda. No contacting employers because of disagreements or purely for hate against a person they don't like. No calling Child Protective Services. No practicing on exclusion.  No leading from behind. No leaving bad taste in people's mouths. No attacking other organizations. With HLAA, everybody is involved and we/they help each other out regardless of communication preferences.

Money raised is shared between the national organization (Hearing Loss Association of America) and local Walk sites.

Examples of how funds are used include:

National Programs

• Advocating for the rights of people with hearing loss
• Information, referral, education and coping resources through www.hearingloss.org, the Hearing Loss Magazine, the annual HLAA Convention, and the HLAA electronic newsletter
• A nationwide network of 200 chapters providing personal support
• 14 state organizations advocating for expanded state services
• Support for parents of children with hearing loss at www.kidsandhearingloss.org
• Outreach to veterans returning with hearing loss
• Social networking site for young adults with hearing loss at www.hearinglossnation.org

Local Programs

• Captioning and hearing assistive technology at chapter meetings to make them accessible
• Scholarships for students with hearing loss towards college tuition
• Funding for hearing aids and devices for people who cannot afford them
• Installation of hearing assistive technology in public places
• Captioning of live theater productions
• Seminars on coping with hearing loss for families

Congratulations to Walk4Hearing on their successful fund raising effort. I'm sure money will be put to good use.

Just watch me

In the world of business there are so many people out there who will tell you that you can't succeed. But what some of them will do is they turn around and say, "Just watch me!" And succeed they do. Because if people can succeed because of a product then success will be his and the company's.

Deaf Zombie Walk 2011

Aaargghh! They are alive! Er...dead! Um, well, they're deaf zombies practicing their zombie walk for charity at the 2011 Flint Zombie Walk.

Deaf Zombies Invade Halloween!

Happy Halloween and welcome to the night of the deaf zombies. Be wary of mindless deaf zombie professors roaming the haunted hallways of schools seeking fresh brains and flesh for they are bereft of it. Once sane professors of higher learning succumbed to the ravages of the zombie virus leaving them as mindless zombie professors yearning for real fresh brains for some reason.  Like this one here.

But people continually ask do deaf zombies exist? Where are they? Why aren't they included? That's the real question on Halloween night. Yet we see evidence of deaf zombies roaming aimlessly unaware of their very own empty existence but a desire for fresh flesh to sustain their ravenous appetites.



In the end of the video the professor gets attacked by his own deaf zombie students who will soon join the mindless cadre of deaf zombies. Call that irony.  But do we see evidence of deaf zombie professors? Yes! They do exist!

Be careful of them. Zombiehood isn't exactly a desirable trait to have when your brain turns to Swiss cheese.

Happy Halloween! Boo!

If you want a real scare next year, be sure to visit the Nightmare Factory at Oregon School for the Deaf located in Salem. A haunted entertainment with the help of the popular tv show Extreme Makeover (see video of that show here).



DISCLAIMER: Zombies do not exist. They are fictional imagination of the human mind despite the rising popularity of zombies in movies, tv shows, games and haunted showings and it being a $5.7 billion dollars a year business enterprise. All zombie characters in this blog and videos are in fact real human beings playing as zombies. Of course, you knew that. Right?

Anybody for Zombie Monopoly game for some mindless fun? I promise you it won't cost you $656 dollars. 

Successful Deaf/HH Entrepreneurs

Successful deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs. The numbers are few and far in between but they are out there if you look hard enough. What gets me excited is seeing successful, legitimate, ethical businesses run by deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs whether they know sign language or not. It becomes an even greater excitement if you personally know someone running a successful business and watched it grow from the very beginning. I don't say this often or make it apparent but there is a certain satisfaction on seeing deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs struggle after many years of hard work, the long hours they put in coming to fruition on the horizon and beyond when their businesses finally take off in a big way.

That's the American dream. But it ain't all that easy.

Approximately 50 percent of new businesses go out of business within 5 years in a good economy. The reason for failure is many.  It's even harder for deaf and hard of hearing owned businesses to survive beyond the first 5 year and I would consider a company a success if they survive beyond the 5 year magic mark.  Though nowadays it's harder still for any businesses to survive in our current recession economy when everybody is cutting back to save money.  So, it was a nice surprise seeing an article when RIT/NTID their first Deaf Entrepreneurs Roundtable Panel discussion last year in the effort to help uncover keys to successful deaf entrepreneurship.

The panel discussion, “Deaf and Hard of Hearing Entrepreneurs—Living the Dream,” explored a multitude of issues related to deaf entrepreneurship. The panel consisted of eight deaf and hard-of-hearing entrepreneurs from around the country who shared their keys to success and explained some of the challenges that they encountered along the way.

With the advantage of technology today communication is made possible between entrepreneurs regardless of communication preference as they share many common grounds than not. It's a great idea to bring together deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs to discuss ways to survive running a business and make it a successful one.  By learning from each other businesses can leverage those knowledge to better compete in a tough market dominated mostly by hearing people and businesses. So, it's hard to get the deserved recognition.

A coveted spot for any new businesses would to be featured in INC Magazine top 500 fastest growing private company. Although very, very few deaf or hard of hearing owned businesses ever get featured in INC Magazine such as Keen Guides whose owner was one of the RIT/NTID Deaf Entrepreneurs Roundtable Panel members in 2010. One key to recognizance is for a business to be a "game changer." You have a particular technology or business model that fits what it appears to be a niche market but only to find out it's really a much bigger market once the idea takes off by fulfilling a demand. Inclusivity is the key in many business models in the deaf/hh -owned businesses. Inclusivity is a rather large market need to fill when you have 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States who typically do not have the same type of access and enjoyment that hearing people have.

Company: Keen Guides In 2004, Catherine McNally — deaf since she was 8 months old — was at a museum and asked for an alternative to the audio tour… only to be handed a 50-page manuscript. Talk about an “aha” moment. Today, her company makes mobile tours available on iTunes that use captions and American Sign Language; there are currently 136 tours available in Seattle, New Orleans and the Washington, DC, area, among others. While funding is pending, McNally is charging full-speed ahead with plans to reach 1,111 sites across the US by November.

The Message: “I am using my work to bring greater awareness for inclusive accessibility in cultural tourism,” McNally says. www.keenguides.com.

This is what I've always advocated, the need for inclusiveness for all people, deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people regardless of communication preference.  There is no feeling of inclusiveness when you watch a video that isn't captioned or subtitled (that can be done by capable people and without much effort versus those who refuse on ideological grounds) and instead gets handed a transcript of that video whether it's done with voice or sign language. There are a few deaf and hard of hearing businesses that I'm aware of who had that "Ah ha" moment and decided to make a business out of it. A time when everything makes sense to risk it because no one else thought of it before on the need to make it work. What makes many deaf and hard of hearing owned businesses successful is their fulfillment of the need for deaf and hard of hearing customers and clients to feel included because they know exactly how they feel.  And that, my friends, is a potential multi-billion dollar market place with 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States.  The question is, how can you tap into that potential?

Hiding behind the "entertainment" claim

Interesting blog piece but yet again an overtly (and obvious) personal one under the guise as being simply a fictional, "entertainment" blog piece. And the obvious effort to twist the story a bit under the guise as a "fictional story." Strange, huh?  I've addressed this before in a similar vein. Others have addressed it as well recognizing such writings as personal in nature simply because of the nature of targeting individuals under the guise as an "entertainment venue."  

Deafread is an aggregator site and not explicitly for "entertainment purposes" as people should already know. The owners developed DeafRead as a way to allow everyone a voice, including mine, for those who sign up.

One central reason for developing DeafRead is that Jared and I wanted to empower the deaf community; we wanted to allow everyone a voice, a place where people could speak out. 

I am one of those voices. They make a key point in Deafread about the purpose of its aggregator, note the bold.

An aggregator simply gathers posts; it does not mean we support or reject the content within each post. We don't censor blogs based on the bloggers' opinions. We publish everything as long as it is deaf-related and satisfies the guidelines. 

So, this "Deaf Anthology" blog appears to satisfy Deafread's guidelines. And that's fine. At least have the cojones to admit that what was written was essentially personal in nature instead of hiding behind a disclaimer that blogs written were simply fictional in nature or for "entertainment venue". Deaf Anthology, if you have an actual, real, bonafide complaint, then take it up with Deafread.

UPDATE: Again, if you have a real, bonafide complaint, take it up with Deafread instead of relying on fictional blogs. Secondly, understand that Deafread never made any promise of taking anyone to some "promise land" but rather an aggregator site to give voice to all sides. Plus, they even put up a disclaimer.

"DeafRead does not endorse any of the blogs by the mere act of publishing."

 Learn to agree to disagree.

Thought of the day: Double standards

There is no "anti-deafhood." Just that we have no interest in such a concept and certainly don't care for these fanaticism and pushiness by means of peer pressure in order to get people to conform to their DH. They play the games of double standards. Their words betray their actions. And their actions betray their words. We prefer to accept diversity as it is and keep things simple without all of the utter nonsense.

MTVU at Gallaudet - the next brouhaha..ha ha?

It was an interesting beginning episode of the new MTVU tv reality series "Quiet Campus: Welcome to Gallaudet." Four Gallaudet University students introduced themselves in the show.  All of them came from mainstreamed schools. Two of them were strongly oral, a third one a late deafened student who lost her hearing while as a hearing child due to chemotheraphy who described herself as "deaf with a splash of hearing," and a fourth one described himself as a gay latino with "three strikes against him" (i.e. deaf, gay and latino). It was a nice video introduction and a way to show the world what Gallaudet University is like. Although there seems to be a bit of mild "brouhaha" going on with the complaint that the show was missing a "culturally Deaf ASL-using students be a part of the cast." Sure, why not. Although I'm not making a big deal out of it. Nor am I making a big deal of Taylor who described herself as "deaf with a splash of hearing" (i.e. hard of hearing). She's simply being with herself. I've no desire to make any kind of judgement against her or the cast based on their upbringing or what school they went to. Or how they describe themselves as. They are students of Gallaudet University and are representatives of that school and the Deaf community. Also, just because a deaf person went to a mainstreamed school does not necessarily mean they're not culturally deaf. A lot of that depends on their background and their primary means of communication among themselves.

Perhaps people should be asking the hard questions. Who did MTVU consult with at Gallaudet University about the selection process for their new reality show? Somebody inside at Gallaudet University administration had to know about the upcoming MTVU show beforehand before giving their approval. Was there any consultation at all? Were recommendations given on how to select the students? Who were involved? How were the cast members selected by MTVU? What were the criteria for the selection? And so on. Instead of targeting those four students who described themselves as mainstream students at one time.

Double Dog Dare You!

It is just fascinating to hear comments every now and then through the grapevines that gets filtered down to me in my emails about the few Deaf people who continually dismiss me as someone who is supposedly angry at the Deaf community for "not accepting me." Or that I'm "lonely" which is funny because whenever I opine strongly or present facts on certain deaf-related issues in my blogs (or vlogs) do they resort to this sort of low ball approach of attacking instead of making cogent arguments. Whenever a loss for words they go for the guns and call me an "extremist" something ..something.. whatever. It's like them playing the race card over and over and over because that is  their only response they have left in the cards thinking it's a cogent argument.

Deaf community does not accept me?

How droll and laughable that argument has become lately.

Why? Well, looking back it's funny because the term "Deaf community" has always meant the culturally deaf community. That has always been the defined framework for years in the attempt to instill that message so far ingrained it can only mean "culturally deaf people" (Padden, Carol; Tom Humphries (1988). Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture) and nothing else.

Nowadays you have some Deaf people trying to move the goal post in their desperate bid to concoct a new meaning of the term "D"eaf as to also include people with all kinds of hearing loss whether they are hearing aid users, cochlear implant users, oral deaf, SEE users, cued speech users, late deafened (and not "latened" deaf, folks!), implantable hearing aid users, and anybody with mild to profound hearing loss. In other words, their newly made up term "D"eaf people would apply to the 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States. Using the argument that I am "angry" because the "Deaf community" hasn't accepted me becomes even sillier worthy of a joke or two. It simply becomes a losing argument! Wait til I show this to my Deaf, deaf, hh and hearing Facebook friends and fans of my blog and ask them why they have not "accepted me" for who I am.

Note the sarcasm.

Let's suppose they keep the original intended meaning of the term "D"eaf that Deaf people have
worked so hard to define over the last 25 years (see Padden, Carol; Tom Humphries (1988). Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture) to mean "culturally deaf people" and apply that term in "Deaf community" with all of its intended meaning.

We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture.  The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society.  We distinguish them from, for example, those who find themselves losing their hearing because of illness, trauma or age; although these people share the condition of not hearing, they do not have access to the knowledge, beliefs, and practices that make up the culture of Deaf people.

 Fine. Except that using the same argument that I am "angry at the Deaf community" for not
"accepting me" fails miserably as well because it would indicate a "members only" mentality based on sign language and culture. I have many Deaf friends (old and new ones, even the ones from NTID) that I keep track of in my Facebook and Deaf people I don't know well enough who simply accept and support me for who I am. They are part of the Deaf community. In other words, I see no evidence of their rejection of me.  In all actuality, the whole rejection notion comes from the very few Deaf people who simply have a beef with me and don't like me. Pretty straight forward and obvious. Heck, even Tayler Mayer doesn't reject me and that's a whole lotta Deaf community behind him with his DeafRead and DVTV communities which continues to grow and thrive despite the failed walkout.

Bottom line, we simply accept each other for who we are. I feel no rejection from the "Deaf community" as a whole, folks. Sorry to disappoint the few "unfans."

If that's not the "Deaf community" context in mind then perhaps it's using the "Gallaudet University as the Deaf community" argument since I did go there from 1988 to 1991 in only 3 1/2 short years graduating with a bachelor degree in mathematics. Even using that argument fails on so many levels because a good portion of my Deaf friends were the ones I met while at Gallaudet University. Heck, I even got kudos from Deaf people sitting in the audience (and on the panel) after I did my verbal speech presentation at the first ever blog/vlog (see video of my presentation at 1:25 to 1:42 with an ASL interpreter) conference at Gallaudet University, including comments in my blog offering praise and kudos from the very people in the Deaf community.  It was an honor that Jill Bradbury at Gallaudet University selected me along with several other bloggers/vloggers to attend the conference. She left an astute comment in my blog about diversity.

Mike - I thought it took a lot of confidence to stand up and speak during your panel. By doing so, you helped the conference make a strong statement about embracing diversity in the deaf community. Waving hands! At dinner someone said to me that you are supporting the deaf community in a really valuable way through your interest in technology. Thanks for keeping us informed! Jill.Bradbury | 02.04.07 - 1:28 pm |

It's all about embracing diversity. I accept people with hearing loss regardless of their background, regardless of whether they know sign language or not. The same goes on their acceptance of me for who I am regardless of my communication preferences or background. I just go about a different way of interacting with people of various backgrounds and communication preferences. Something that few seem to not understand.

It's one thing to disagree with a person's opinion but an entirely another realm of fantasy to use a piss poor claim of my being "angry" because the Deaf community "rejected" me as a substitute argument.  Having several Deaf people who don't like me or reject me do not make a "Deaf community."

Gawrsh! *kicks a pebble*

This whole blog piece was precipitated when I looked back on some old comments that were a few years old on somebody else's blog. A few Deaf people actually  "double dog" or "triple dog" dared me to sign in my own video believing I couldn't sign and I was simply a helpless ol "orally." And, of course, the rest was history once I did that. But then they complained even more because of my opinionated signed vlogs both in the signed and spoken format (along with my own subtitles).  Got to laugh at the irony when it comes to diversity and accessibility. How about if I do a "double dog" dare to those same people and ask them to add subtitles in their own signed vlogs? No, make that a triple dog dare! I bet dollars to donuts they won't.

A Poll: How much money you are willing to spend on technology for better work potential?

For deaf and hard of hearing people, how much money are you willing to spend on technology to ensure a better career path, business opportunities and/or promotion potential?