The magic in THE MOLECULES!

THE MOLECULES, by EU author Kevin Mc, was released yesterday and is now available on our website, and the book will also be available for Kindle via Amazon.com shortly! We are delighted to make this release announcement for our second book, which we are really excited about, not least because it will further underline the arrival of Kevin Mc as well as EU onto the self-publishing scene. Both books are truly original and could only have come from Kevin Mc; we are very proud that it is EU who is the publisher of both books, and for those to come. We give kudos to Kevin Mc for handing us a second book so soon after his first, moreover one that is completely different from his last. It's only a matter of time and a little luck before he gets the recognition that we feel he sorely deserves, and we cannot wait to see what he is going to produce for book #3! If he keeps on getting better and better each time, then EU is going to start becoming a name of some repute in the self-publishing world, and that's exactly what we all want! 

In the meantime, go check out some background on the story behind THE MOLECULES in the  Author's Annex section of our website , as well as here on our blog and also on our  Facebook page. This book is going to be big, so why not grab a copy now before the world and his wife all claim to have loved Kevin Mc before anyone else knew who he was! The time for THE MOLECULES has come, and we think it will  be a fun read not only for big (grown-up) kids everywhere, but should also be mandatory reading for all high school science programs. It cannot help but inspire a few, if not many, to dig down deep into their very own scientific world and experience the magic that lies within it. Just as reading THE MOLECULES was itself a magical experience for us all! We have let it go, so now our little secret is out there for all to own and to treasure as their very own little secret, at least for now. ENJOY! - EU

Danny Boyle knocks it out of the "park", i.e. the Olympic stadium!

After years of planning, we were treated last night to the opening ceremony of the 2012 London Olympics, and now everyone gets the chance to say whether it lived up to all the hype or not. Why should it be any different for me, not least as I usually proffer my opinions whether invited to do so, or not! 

Firstly, let's get the dinosaur in the room out of the way, right from the get-go. I am of course referring to Beijing, and all the hue and cry that it will never be equaled, etc., blah-blah-blah. The Beijing opening was something else, yes, but in my opinion such grand openings are to be taken as standalone items, and comparison between them, or putting one down in relation to another, is futile. It would be a bit like saying that  this U2 show was way better than that one, based on personal preferences or due to song choices made, but in the end, it is entirely the case that both shows were spectacular spectacles. Furthermore, there is a vast cultural divide between being Chinese and being British, and any attempt to mirror Beijing would surely have been disastrous. 

Now that we have wiped Beijing from the equation, we are free to remember what was a stunning, image- and history-filled ceremony that was as unquestionably British as it was entertaining. That's what it's all about, too: entertainment. The choice of Danny Boyle as artistic director was an inspired one, and his handiwork could be seen throughout the display. It was light on the pomp and glory normally associated with the empire, and came tinged with that unmistakable British sense of humor, while sweeping wildly from highbrow literature references, art and dance, to full blown punk rock, and everywhere else in-between.

The Queen even joined in on the fun in a humorous sketch with none other than James Bond himself that starred the royal corgis, and ending with HRH and Bond parachuting out of a helicopter into the heart of the Olympic ceremonial action. This was an unprecedented move by Buckingham Palace: actually facilitating the acting debut of HRH with none other than Daniel Craig, and it truly shows the softening side of the Royals in general, but surely the Queen in particular. I think it was a brilliant move, and almost certainly, no one other than Danny Boyle could have persuaded her to do it. 

At the same time, Boyle did not create an overly pompous ceremony, nor cater to the highbrow type of backdrop that one might usually invoke for a royal performance. Rather, he created a celebration of art and music that was very much of a popular nature, i.e. a soundtrack to life for typical British working class people who grew up during any of the decades represented. It was a ceremony that represented the public, and was for the public. 

I definitely felt a shiver or two when I heard a band such The Jam blasting out with the Union Jacks flying during an Olympic ceremony with HRH in attendance. I give full kudos to Boyle for also slipping in a British band that changed the world of music, even if it was by making music that many (Buckingham Palace included, I am sure) considered "disgusting and depraved" at the time. I am naturally referring to The Sex Pistols, whose "God Save The Queen" was banned by the BBC, and could not be played on radio or TV, even while it was #1 in the UK pop charts. "God save the Queen, she ain't no human being" sort of says it all, I think.

We must have come a long, long way, when The Queen can sit through video of The Sex Pistols performing some of their "filth" live, and for it all to feel, today in 2012, as a celebration of all things British, as opposed to an embarrassment for Britain. In beautiful irony, The Sex Pistols and the Royal Family are as emphatically British as each other, and to juxtapose them during a ceremony that was seen all over the planet makes perfect sense to this guy. It was a significant moment that reflected not just our history, but also the progress that we are supposed to make during our own lifetime of evolution. Mr. Boyle hit the nail on the head, squarely and firmly!

Now that it is all done and dusted, let the real fun and games begin! I can't wait! Kevin Mc

Not just a fading legacy, but one eradicated completely!

Following on the heels of my last blog on the dark night, we were introduced to the new dark day at Penn State, yesterday. Following the conviction of former assistant head coach, Jerry Sandusky, on some 45 charges of child sex abuse carried out over 15 years, the time for analysis was over and retribution was the next step. While Sandusky's fate will be sealed by the judicial process, the fate of the Penn State football program lay in different hands. 

First off, there was/is the court of public opinion, one that includes the friends and families of all those who were abused under the reign of the legendary Joe Paterno/Jerry Sandusky football franchise. When the scandal broke there was an outpouring of hate for Sandusky, yet continued admiration for Joe Paterno, the winningest head coach in college football history. Student fans even came to his house to hold a vigil after he was fired by Penn State, along with then college President, Graham Spanier, back in November, 2011.  Support for Paterno was initially strong, and hatred of Sandusky grew due to Paterno paying the price for another's criminal acts. But it was clearly going to become extremely divisive as various sides stood up for or put down Paterno for his involvement in the scandal.

Secondly, there was the high level investigation headed up by none other than Louis Freeh, a former judge and ex-FBI Director. Many, particularly the family of Paterno, were hoping that this report would fall on the right side for Team Paterno, and that the blame could be clearly placed fully on Sandusky's shoulders. However, Freeh's almost 300 page report was quite scathing of Paterno's role in the cover-up of Sandusky's nefarious actions, dating as far back as the late 90's; this further infuriated the surviving Paterno family members, who obviously felt that a great man's legacy was being torn apart in the absence of a defense. 

One of the most tragic aspects of the situation was that not long after the scandal broke, and Paterno lost his job after 46 years of service, he succumbed to cancer and passed away: so he was not around to defend himself or to offer any explanation for his actions, or lack thereof. Thus it would be left to mere speculation as to his reasons for doing nothing following the accusations against Sandusky, especially strange for a man seen as a mentor and leader to young men not only at Penn State, but all over the country.

Thirdly, there was the inevitable step-in by the NCAA.  Everyone expected the worst, and some were even predicting it, in the form of the feared "death sentence" of the entire football program at Penn State. This is not what transpired, not least as Penn State were not under sanctions already, but what was handed down was one hell of a blow, and one that might have gone too far in one particular aspect.

NCAA President, Mark Emmert, coolly and calmly handed over the judgement: a fine of $60M (an entire year's revenue for the football program), ineligiblity to compete in bowl games for four years, a loss of 40 scholarships over the next four years, and five years probation. All of this seemed more or less par for the course, until the cliffhanger. In a staggering and unprecedented move, the NCAA have vacated every single win by Paterno and the team between 1998 and 2011.

This unbelievable loss strips a whopping 111 wins from the roster of 409 wins by Paterno, and firmly knocks him off the top spot for wins in major college football, because he now drops back down to 298. As cruel as this seems, especially for a dead man being mourned by a caring, loving family, I feel that this punishment unnecessarily pains his other loving, caring family: the teams! Those who gave their all for him on the field.

While I am totally at ease with the severity of the steps taken by the NCAA against him, I think we should remember that he was fired, and died shortly thereafter of cancer. It is one thing to want to strip a dead man of his professional legacy, but the people who pay the most for the vacated wins surely have to be the athletes who made such a massive contribution to his legacy. They did not indulge in criminal activity to win those games; they won them fair and square and due to sweat, muscle, pain, effort, blood and tears. The fact that their coach had covered up child abuse accusations should not negate their physical victory on the tundra, not least if any of them had actually been subject to that abuse themselves.

Paterno's legendary statue at the Penn State football stadium was ripped from the ground and erased from the college infrastructure yesterday morning, via an order from new President Rod Erickson who stated that it was divisive and would not help the healing process. Again, as drastic and as sad an action as that is, I can see the point, even if it all begins to feel like the wiping out of essentially a man's entire existence, over claims that he never got to respond to or vigorously defend.

What I find troublesome is the taking away of victories that occurred out on green fields, and surely those victories belong as much if not more so to the athletes who achieved them? Why are they being similarly punished? The team victories could have stood, but Paterno could have had his coaching wins reduced for the assigned time period, thus stripping him of his winningest coach title. He was at fault, not his players. 

This aspect of the NCAA sanctions can only serve to demoralize the current students at the college, and leave a very bitter taste in the mouths of anyone who gave their all on the field for Penn State between 1998 and 2011. Jerry Sandusky was at fault; well, he was a criminal. Joe Paterno was at fault, but in a more ethical though extremely damaging manner. The players just worked out and won games, as they were asked to do. I think it is sending the wrong message to punish them in this way, and it is simply not fair. Sadly, life rarely is, it seems. - Kevin Mc

Truly a dark, dark night...

What more can one say about the horrific recent massacre at a "Dark Knight Rises" midnight premiere, in Aurora, Colorado? It is as unthinkable as it is totally believable, sadly, and the frequency of militarily-armed lunatics running rampant and railing against society is on the rise. Yet we still tend to feel that it's always an isolated incident, and it always happens in another city or town than our own, until it does happen.

This time the criminal was supposedly one of society's brightest, a science PhD candidate, a career path that both owners of the Evergreen Umbrella brand can identify with very well. We both know how frustrating an investment over several years in basic biomedical research can be, not least as one is paid peanuts for often working seven days a week. But the whole point is that it is a passion, and even if frustration in achieving success is part and parcel of the game, that passion overrides the tough times. How someone in such a noble and intellectual pursuit as neuroscience research could begin to plan a local massacre is beyond me, and beyond even the wildest of imaginations. 

There is something wrong when a private individual can go online and have several deliveries over just 60 days of ammunition, explosive materials, gas canisters, and detonation components. After 911, one would think that even a PhD student ordering 6,000 rounds of ammunition online and having them delivered to his door would have triggered an alert of some sort. Apparently not. This is wrong, and is indicative of the whole problem of gun control in the US. 

That such massacres are still possible after Columbine in 1999, and the other shootings that followed it, is a damning indictment of the fact that gun control is totally out of control. The NRA can bleat all it wants about statistics showing that there is less crime since America armed itself, but that should fall on deaf ears. If you look closely at the responses of Barack Obama, Mitt Romney or even Denver Mayor, Michael Hancock, you will notice two key words missing: gun control. In my opinion, these are the two first words that should be on their mind. 

But as they all know, those two nasty little words are a huge turn-off to voters (they say), and as we all know, Obama doesn't ever take a stand for anything that could lose him ten votes here, or eleven there. He only jumps political stances to get votes, never to lose any. I think he should be ashamed of himself for letting an election stand in the way of making a clear statement that gun control was back on the table, as of yesterday. A total of 70 people either injured or dead, but we can't have a little thing like that forcing him to bring up a poisonous issue which could cost him his cosy berth in the big old white house, can we?

While it is easy to think of this as primarily an American problem, there is one fact about this massacre that is as devastating as it seems basically impossible. One of the people murdered in Aurora had been a survivor of the recent Eaton Centre mall shooting in Toronto, Canada. Yes, Canada. Jessica Ghawi, 24, had narrowly escaped another similar event in early June where two people were killed and more were injured, by sheer good luck, and/or her own instinct that something didn't feel quite right. 

As she stated in her own blog, she felt that she had been blessed and had cheated perhaps death itself, and came out of it with an even greater sense of both the fragility as well as the preciousness of life. What would the chances be of being in another venue-related shooting massacre, in another country, mere weeks later? That she was present at both massacres, survived one, and was murdered at the other, just seems to be an incomprehensible fact that the odds were stacked so massively against. 

But therein lies the problem. Gun control is so out of control that these type of events and the chances of experiencing them more than once in a lifetime appear to have gone up, significantly, and that is a problem for each and every one of us. The only way that anything remotely positive could come out of such a tragedy would be for the US and Canada (and everywhere else) to get real serious, real quick, about the capacity of your next door neighbor to stockpile a mountain of weaponry to execute a masterplan that exerts their resentment of the world in the form of executing people. So doing, in the most cold-blooded and cowardly fashion possible, I might add. 

However, living in the real world, I think that we all know that little will change, especially in the US. It's gone gun crazy. There are an estimated 300 million guns out there in the hands of the American public: more or less one gun for every person living there. This is such a ridiculously frightening statistic that it alone could be seen as the nail in the coffin for any hope of eventual gun control. It's a truly depressing fact, and one that just made a significant impact on the lives of 70 people in Aurora, and all of those in and around their lives. All we can do is offer our condolences to them and their families; it is the President's and government's job to actually start doing something about it. - Kevin Mc

Taking a big bite out of the Apple!

In relation to a few of my recent blogs regarding the enormous progress made by Samsung in eating away at the Apple share of the smartphone and tablet market, and the Apple response to take it to court and accuse Samsung of outright copying of their coolness and products, a British judge has weighed in on the matter in a significant fashion. 

In what seems to be an incredibly surprising salt-in-the-wound fuel-to-the-fire move, Judge Birss has ordered Apple to run ads stating that "Samsung did not copy" its iPad design. These notices are to be posted in both British newspaper media, as well as on Apple's own website! Almost unbelievable! 

It's one thing to be told that your claim of patent infringement over a device is not going to be upheld, but to be forced into posting what will be de facto Samsung advertisements on your own corporately branded website is something else! Samsung lawyers must have been staring at the judge in awe and disbelief, not least as the judge ordered the notice (i.e. Samsung ad) to remain on the Apple website for at least six months. 

This is a totally unexpected twist on the entire Apple vs. Samsung saga, but one which hopefully might teach the mighty Apple a lesson: outrageous greed is not healthy. As much as the Steve Jobs era was one of explosive creativity and growth for the company, so it was also apparently punctuated with increasing lust for world dominance, and any/all serious competition was to be eliminated or sued out of existence. The Apple's share had to be the lion's share.

Steve Jobs was allegedly behind the whole e-book price-fixing scandal along with various major publishers, targeting the self-publishing kings, Amazon, and Apple are currently being pursued by the US Justice Department for running that "cartel". It is estimated that Jobs' banging of the table for everyone to fall into line, or else, bilked the public out of as much as an additional illicit $100M in e-book price-fixed.cash This is a total disgrace for a company that was already so wealthy, and which targeted the little guys, either producing/selling or buying e-books. 

Cry no tears over (an) Apple, people. They can afford to pay. So another amazing brand has stepped up and challenged them to some good old healthy competition, and has taken a serious bite (or three) out of the Apple? I say kudos to them because those who benefit are you and me, with ever-better devices in our hands for ever-lower (relatively speaking) prices. Apple needs to grow up a little (or a lot) and accept the fact that for the consumers some competition is a great thing, and Apple would not be anywhere today if not for those very same consumers. 

I wonder if part or all of this sour Apple frustration has arisen out of the fact that they know their very own soon-to-be-launched iPhone5 is gonna get its ass kicked by the already pervasive Samsung Galaxy SIII?! Hell, it may well be the case that the Samsung Galaxy SII has even kicked its ass, already! For sure, my uber-cool SII is a better device than any iPhone on the market today, and makes the iPhone4 look small, tired and past its prime, in comparison.


Again, my advice would be to stop moaning and suing, and start building competitive devices instead. Unless with Steve Jobs sadly gone, that level of innovative and competitive brilliance is also sadly missing today?

Samsung is riding high with these new legal developments, their heavy sponsorship of the upcoming London Olympics, and naturally, the firestorm that is spreading globally over the new Galaxy SIII superphone. It appears to me that the Apple is indeed a green one, or has been turned green:; it's called brand envy, or in this case to be more specific, Samsung envy! Now that fact has just got to be the biggest and cheapest piece of global advertising that Samsung will ever experience, and to top it off, the proof will be posted on the Apple website for all to see. That's what I call sheer brand brilliance: getting a sourpuss major competitor to give you free global advertising on their website! Incredible!

Samsung smiles all around the world, it would seem! - Kevin Mc

Spellbound by those magnificent molecules!

“What are you thinking about son?” said the shaman of the river, as he slid the fish back into the lined pouch in his fishing bag.

“Well, I was wondering how a creature like that could have come from a few atoms splashing around in a muddy pool. A big fat silvery shiny thing, with gills to breathe under water, scales to prevent the water from entering its body, a tail as an engine, and eyes that always stay open to be ready for anything. How can atoms make this happen?”

“Haha! So he knows about atoms, does he?!”

“Yes! I learned it in chemistry. Atoms. They have a dense nucleus, with protons and neutrons, surrounded by orbits of electrons. Reminds me of the Earth, our nucleus, with the planets flying around us. Atoms started everything. Yet we can’t see them, they are too small for the human eye.”

“I see….well, let me leave you with a thought, before I go up the hill, home. Maybe you should be thinking of it more in terms of molecules, they are what made all this possible. You have heard of them, yes?”

Molly-cools. A nice word. Yes I had heard of them, but I was still figuring out whether it meant like two atoms together, or could big complex combinations of atoms be thought of as molecules. I didn’t want to appear stupid by saying something nonsensical.

“Yes. I am still examining the idea of molecules, but I do know about covalent bonds and ionic bonds that join atoms together into molecules, and that often, different properties result.”

“Very good. Well, think about it some more, and next time, we will have a chat about the molecules. They are really the guilty party; they got us here, all the way from a few of them bubbling in an organic soup, to fishing on a river today. Now there’s a story no one would believe if you came up with it! Alright off I go, keep a closer eye on that float now. Best of luck, and remember.....keep the faith!”

A very interesting character indeed, I said to myself. He seemed to know science! As well as clearly being a professional fisherman: the proof was in his bag. It was also on my hands now too, which had a wonderful stinky odor on them. What a smell! I wondered what chemical or chemicals were responsible for it, and was the smell meant to disgust humans, so as to put us off fishing? I would test the smell on my mother later, and get a reaction. 

The man waved down at me from the bridge, and I waved back. Hmm, "Keep the faith", again. Maybe he really might mean the fishing faith and the science faith? I always liked to give unique characters equally unique names, and so, based on observation, and experience, his was clear. He would now be referred to, in my head at least, as The Keeper of the Faith. 

[Excerpted from Kevin Mc's new book, The Molecules, which will be published in July, 2012]

Faded American Idol(s)

American Idol, still one of the biggest shows in television despite slipping in the ratings of late, is facing new challenges with the loss of two star judges inside two days. Steven Tyler announced his departure on Thursday and Jennifer Lopez followed suit on Friday morning, and it seems likely that Tyla's announcement was just a nail in the coffin for J-Lo.  This leaves original host Randy Jackson on his own once again, waiting to hear who Fox will stick in the chairs beside him next season.

Much as I can understand that a little star power can boost a show's ratings, AI does create it's own revolving judges door by so doing. Why? Well, let's be frank, what do you think was the main reason that someone like a Tyla or a J-Lo signed on for AI in the first place? Some of you are crying "money!" I am sure, but it's only partly correct. First off, they both had plenty of it, so unless they are greedy, money, in and of itself, was not the major reason, per se. 

It's a four letter word that was the real reason: fame! Neither of them were exactly at the pinnacle of their fame and careers, their stars had faded considerably, and in Tyla's case there were even rumors of "his" band, Aerosmith, talking about hiring a new frontman. Something that seems unthinkable and would never work, anyway. But both of these types love fame, and the spotlight, and AI provided a perfect vehicle for rekindling the fires and reminding a whole new audience (i.e. the young) who they were.

So of course it's no shock that once the fading star has had his/her career resurrected by having been on and been plugged by AI, that they have no time to lose and need to jump off the AI bandwagon to get back on their own. The new-found fame does get the cash registers ringing too, so yes, money is still part of the equation. But there's little loyalty; they got what they wanted out of AI, and then they're off. Constancy is sadly lacking on AI as a result. 

Here's what I don't get: isn't the show supposed to be about making the career of a young unknown amateur singer, rather than being a vehicle to get aging rock stars or forgotten divas back up on that stage?! Why are there not record industry insiders and professionals in those judges chairs? It's no coincidence that the judge that made that show so huge is not a music star himself, but is someone who has talent at judging and discovering talent: Simon Cowell. I cannot be alone in preferring to hear on-point critique by someone who  is a big name in the record business, rather than someone who maybe can sing but has zero experience in discovering talent. 

The AI brand has been negatively impacted by the revolving door of judges that now includes Simon Cowell, Paula Abdul, Kara DioGuardi, Ellen Degeneres, Steven Tyler and Jennifer Lopez. Ironically, the original judges trio was easily the best. Cowell, Abdul and Jackson worked on many levels especially in the critical chemistry department. DioGuardi was a mistake, not least because four judges was one too many, she is not a made-for-TV personality and brought a degree of condescension ("listen, sweetie") into the room that got in the way. Degeneres was the single biggest mistake in AI history, and it was a decision that still makes zero sense to me today; "Let's bring in someone who has their own TV audience all set up, even if they've got zero experience in music and nothing of any significance to say on the subject." It was a perfect example of ambition overstepping actual abilities and it was inevitable that she would be exited, and quick. Out through the in door. Tyla ("that was beautiful, sweetie.") and J-Lo ("when do I get to perform on AI?") were alright, but they are both way more interested in staring into their own dressing room mirrors than they are in pushing someone else's career. 

The inestimable Ryan Seacrest is a constant and for sure the show still stands a chance with him at the helm. He's a pro. But they have screwed around with AI brand identity, and I think they need to think long and hard about where to go next. Adam Lambert? Didn't he win AI only a few years ago? Shouldn't he be focusing on his own early career, or has he been fast forwarded into the Autumn of his career? Already?! Mariah Carey? Isn't she still kind of a huge star? Why would she do that? Won't they need to build a full blown three storey house on the Fox lot just to accommodate all of the needs of such a legendary diva? Mary J? Another legendary diva with a multifaceted business brand who will use the show to sell more sunglasses and perfumes and maybe even a coincidental new album. These are not the right people, people! 

Let's get back to what it's called: American Idol. As in, future idol. Not current idol, nor faded idol, nor fallen idol. Amateurs sing. They get judged by a trio of people who have in some capacity been involved in the record industry, preferably in screening, discovering and marketing of musical talent. The kids don't need to see a major star in front of them to convince them to try to achieve the same; they already have that drive and that's why they make the top twenty. What they do need to hear is keen advice from the very type of people who broke those stars in the first place! Music industry professionals. They advise the kids to the best of their ability, and the American public votes one of them to the winner's podium. All of this with no annoying plugging of some sixty-four year old's new video or fawning over a freshly divorced ex-diva in her mid-forties. And, for the record, it is time for Ryan to bring back his signature curtain call at the end of each show: "Seacrest........OUT!!!"

Now, that's American Idol! - Kevin Mc

Outbound on the rebound from inbound!

In a footnote or companion piece to our blog of yesterday on the bottom feeding species, "socio mediaphobicus gurubilis", we now come to a major reason why this parasitic new species has been able to thrive. We are of course talking about the close-to-extinct ancient beast: the outbound marketer! 

Jill is quite right in her conclusion, because how much blah-blah-blah can one person sit through? It is our experience that outbound marketers by day, do not suddenly become selfless and attentive by night. All they ever want to do is talk about themselves, their job, their new website, their new clients. While our Jill sits bored out of her mind, as the incessant noxious emissions from the motormouth make her queasy, and she has to race to the ladies room to throw up and get put onto an oxygen mask.

The corollary to this scenario, in business, is,  never hire an outbound marketer to handle an inbound marketer's job. That is an unforgivable error. People have become so confused with all the new tools being introduced, and social media popping all over the place, that they tend to believe that as the outbound woolly mammoth (sorry, marketer) still belongs to the "marketer" species, they can be trusted when they proclaim: "Social media marketing and filling up your funnel? Ahmm, yeah, of course we can do that for you. Cough."

Let's quickly define in general terms what is the modus operandi of the "outbound" and "inbound" marketing sub-types. I often tend to a degree of verbosity, so I will simply direct you to the cartoon above, for a nail-on-the-head visual on what an outbound marketer does: they talk. A lot. About themselves. And what they can do for you. Traditionally, kings of the telephone, and little else. Often defined by being older (because when they went to school, there was no inbound marketing) and more often than not, technological philistines. They didn't like email when it was rolled out, still prefer a Rolodex to a computer, and were rendered almost suicidal by the words "Facebook" and "Twitter" and "Social media marketing". One could label them perhaps as Luddites, but that would be attributing a level of philosophical-intellectual choice in their anti-progress stance that is simply not there. Resistance to change or pure laziness is what lies beneath, not Luddism.

The inbound marketer, on the other hand, does a lot less (or none at all) of the cold calling, lunches, happy hours and blah-blah-blah about me-me-me in their daily routine. They use all of the modern tools available to them via the internet to drive traffic to them, rather than chest-beating. Although the tools they use may vary from one to the other, the common thread should revolve around one key word that EU does love: content. Whether it's a podcast, or blog, or video, or website or an e-book, inbound marketers attract prospects to themselves by producing engaging, interesting and attractive content. They fill up their funnel and then tease the prospects further down into it by engaging content, as they are processed from prospects to leads, which are further nurtured and ultimately converted into sales. All of this can occur with the marketer barely having to leave their office, which is way more efficient in terms of their precious time, and allows them to more readily handle multiple accounts simultaneously. It goes without saying that inbound marketers adore social media, unlike their elder brethern.

Now we come to the six million dollar question! Can an old school outbound marketer become a master of inbound marketing, and help you introduce it into your own business? As tempted as we might be to say "No!", we will temper our opinion, and offer a "It is possible, yes." instead. But while it might be possible, we think it's very rare. You can't really teach an old dog new tricks, or, even if you can, it takes way too long. Those outbounders who took years to do so but eventually stuck a Facebook icon on their website in 2011, and a CEO who said something on Twitter in 2012, are simply going through the motions. One look at their content underlines that conclusion perfectly; they demonstrate readily that they just are not comfortable, at best, or that they clearly have no idea what they are doing, at worst. 


Be smart. Would you go to a family doctor to treat a major life-threatening disease? No. Would you go to your regular dentist for a procedure requiring major jawbone surgery? No. Would you hire a general laborer to raise the sinking foundations of your 100 year old house? No; again, you would see a specialist. So why would you use someone who is a classical outbound marketer to handle your inbound marketing needs? You need to be informed enough to realize that throwing a couple of logos onto a website in 2012, and having posted something on Facebook this year, is not what the pros mean by "social media marketing" or "inbound marketing". In general terms, any outfit who were not on Facebook, Twitter or running a weekly blog before 2011/12 are by definition old school outbound marketers. They have their place, naturally, and there is room for everyone, but they have no place in social media marketing and no business taking your hard-earned cash to run your inbound marketing campaigns. They resisted changing anything in their own business until it was their own wallets that were being eviscerated, and they were forced into social media marketing. It was not a choice, nor the result of having "gone back to school" to learn something new for a change;  it was not welcomed through the door, it kicked it's way in!

People, such types are clinically resistant to change! They panic over change. Why in God's name would you place your trust and your business in their hands? Especially if you are not so different, and your business has suffered due to the same phenotypic resistance to any change. Hire someone who is fearless, and who has already proven that they can use all of the modern tools with great ease and consummate skill, and is willing to show you what they have achieved. You only have to ask someone how many social media campaigns or inbound marketing campaigns they have directed, and their face will tell you all you need to know. Beware the blah-blah-blah, and cut to the chase: "Show me those clients, and their websites and their social media accounts, and give me the data on what percentage increase in sales you achieved for them." When you are still hearing blah-blah-blah? You have your answer.

The scariest beast of all is the classic outbound marketer who's blah-blah-blah has recently become about inbound marketing: now ranting about their new Facebook page, or their Twitter followers (the same number they are following; a dead giveaway) and who suddenly seem to feel that they do it all. All because they finally managed to join Facebook and Twitter in 2012. That in and of itself should have you running a mile! Those who are susceptible to the chest-beating rah-rah's can get taken to the cleaners by a beast that is all mouth and trousers, and little-to-no-content.  Now that's a beast that sends a chill down our spines, brrr! Maybe extinction is a very useful part of natural selection after all, even in business?! You gotta love evolution! - EU

Gurus galore on an online tour: unnatural selection or more a soon-to-be-extinct new species?!

How many social media "gurus" are out there, ready to explain to you what it's all about, how to initiate it, maintain it, and how to make it all work for you? An infinite number, it seems. But how many so-called social media "gurus" does it take to get you off your backside and actually doing it? 


Exactly! A very finite number indeed. That number being zero. None. Zilch.  We read a really funny yet quite accurate definition of the creature known as the "undergrowth-dwelling lesser-spotted social media guru" recently, and so will share it here for illumination.

"Social Media Guru: A term used to assign imaginary expertise in a nascent communications field to an individual with little to no real world business experience and the professional integrity of a bowl of banana pudding."

Hilarious. Perhaps there might be a smidgen of exaggeration in there but overall it is pretty bloody close to the bull's eye. The problem with social media is that it actually has itself created a self-serving forum for all of these so-called and self-professed "gurus"; the great majority of whom know nothing about social media that is not inside the godamn guidelines and help tools and forums of those media themselves. Like they say here in Montreal: "C'est ridicule!"

The saddest thing about the emergence of this new species is that there are so many of them, alongside so many more who apparently prefer to listen to their bleating, rather than going onto Twitter, for example, and reading the extensive guidelines,  troubleshooting and help forum sections. Maybe after that, engaging one's brain, and getting down to creating some engaging content oneself, instead of asking/paying another to tell you what to think and say. 

What makes me laugh regularly is the overtly serious tone often applied to the subject matter, which I find truly ridiculous. Read my lips, people. Okay then, read my type, people! Social media and its money-spinning offshoot, social media marketing, ain't no brain surgery, nor dentistry, or building a car, or even cutting your hair. It's fooling around on your computer or hand-held device, and even when dealing with business, it's meant to be fun! Forget the finger-pointing eyebrows-raised marketer telling you to smarten up! What's next? You want someone to tell you the best way to take your shower each morning, or best grocery store practices for the time-challenged business person? 

Even more risible than the social media "guru" are the social media marketing "wannabes" who push social media tools at you/your company, but for a fee, because (a) they are in the business of communications, and, (b) they have read and claim to be au fait with the law as laid down by one or two of these "gurus". Trust me, any professional communications service provider who needs a social media "guru" to tell them how to tell you how to use social media is just another sheep, following trends. Even then, that usually occurs only after their own period of initial panic and splashing (in the shallow end) over social media in marketing.  

People don't like change, and resist it with a passion, especially if they are over 40-45. So there are all these companies being run by the 45+ gang, who went white when the CEO started banging the table for social media and marketing, and what did they do? Raced off to pay ridiculous amounts of money to companies being run by other 45+ people, who, even in the marketing business, also felt daily nausea at this horrific new trend. And what did they do? Jumped online to find some social media "gurus" to tell daddy what to do, charge him for the advice, and then that charge could be nicely transferred back onto the client in the fee for being "introduced" to social media. It is quite, quite hilarious. A bunch of sheep all being led around by the new species now known as "socio mediaphobicus gurubilis".  

You only have to look at the typical media agency's own use (can usually be read as "lack of use", "misuse" or even "abuse") of social media to run a mile before even thinking of spending a penny on them. They come into your office a-spouting "words of wisdom" from some of the aforementioned species' musings, and bang your table telling you that you have to move, now. Then when they are gone, no one bothers to look at their website to discover that they are not even using the tools that they are telling you are essential for modern marketing, even though they are professional marketers! If they are indeed using social media, and you look closely enough, you can readily detect that they have been on there for a mere hot minute, and their timeline status screams "neophytes". Outrageous! 

Who is worse? The lazy old farts who would sooner pay than think or the old farts that wolf down  "guru" words over luncheon, and then regurgitate them back up onto your boardroom table for afternoon tea, even repeating some of the same tired old mistakes? Well, if our "guru" said it, it must be the truth, right?  Wrong, in many cases!  Professionally speaking, one is worse than the other, but the bottom line is the same: both entities are sheep who are being pushed around by trends and peer pressure. Neither appears capable of truly independent thinking, intellectual analysis or action. They merely copy, or even clone. Social media are collectively an incredibly individualistic pursuit, or should be; there are no ten commandments and the "gurus" have rarely been sanctioned by anyone other than the face in their own bathroom mirrors. 

It is great to see that science has been impacting marketing of late. Not least because once some serious science gets involved, it will weed out the weak. Your typical marketing is far from being an intellectual exercise, that's for sure! Similarly, basic social media use is far from being an intellectual exercise, dear friends, and frankly, if your sons and daughters are doing it, and probably doing it well, therein lies the bottom line. If your 16 year old child is a prince of Facebook, Twitter, Blogger, Pinterest, Instagram and Googleworld, then why would you even consider handing over tens of thousands to some other 16 year old's mom or dad to do social media (marketing) for you? 

It's free. It's easy. It's fun. A PhD in physics it ain't. So what to do? Commit! Place garlic cloves all around your office door and computers, to ward off the "guru" species, close your door, get off your backside, put it back down into the chair at your desk, and begin a social media adventure. Hell, you might even have fun!

Of course, once things evolve, and you truly want to leverage your social media presence and branding to increase sales, that might be a time to spend on doing so, but do it with an outfit which has a proven track record of achieving just that. Science has caught up to marketing, so you can actually ask for the analytics on various social media performance metrics for other clients, to see what that agency can or cannot do for you, Don't take anyone's word for it: demand to see the numbers, charts and data. Go with a team that clearly knows what they are talking about, backed up by that data!

We feel quite blessed here at Evergreen Umbrella. Luckily we are one of those species that is totally immune to infection by the "socio mediaphobicus gurubilis" parasite, and our bullshit detector is super-sensitive to those who might try to use our success-to-date as one source of additional revenue streams for them. If the day ever comes where EU would pay another to handle social media for us, well, that would mean that Kevin Mc must have passed away. We can't see that happening anytime soon, especially as the world needs him so badly; and while he might be "away" on occasion working on a new book in a castle in Ireland, we are confident that he will be back, often, and for a very long time to come! He's our very own (but real deal) social media guru, and the nicest thing is that he neither claims it nor even seems to know it. Hallelujah! - EU 

For function that's also fun, Samsung's number one!

The time has come, not least for us rabid Samsung Galaxy SII lovers, to have a look at the glamorously functional new Samsung Galaxy SIII: the hotly anticipated new superphone from the newly cool Samsung brand. This is the phone that some in the business have dubbed the "iPhone killer". I don't think it will kill anything, rather it will breathe new life into the smartphone segment of the marketplace.

Frankly, after ten minutes of having even the Galaxy SII in my hands, the die was cast. It made the iPhone feel small, and quaintly old-fashioned, instantaneously. The SII combined a gorgeously aesthetic design and uber-cool image, with incredible functionality and  top end-user experience, and that's a tough recipe to beat. All those business executives who had clung to big bad Blackberries, and finally were peer-pressured into buying a dreaded iPhone, suddenly feeling "young" again, now had their dreams of being hip shattered by one of the best brands in the world: Samsung. 

Ironically, the iPhone now dates people. It is clear that the compact design of the iPhone, which was cool or even avant garde back in 2008, or even as recently as 2010, is now a negative. The male hand does not find form and function in the iPhone design: it is too small. Texting and typing has always been a pain for the typical-to-large male hand, hence the appearance of a new breed: the aging executive who thought he was really cool because he bought an iPhone, but he doesn't use it for anything other than as a mobile phone! It's more or less the equivalent of a city-bound business type driving around town in his Ferrari; it's redundant 95% of the time! Mine is bigger than yours, even if it's never used for a fraction of what it is capable of, and all that matters is image. Stereotypical mid-life crisis images, evident even in smartphone usage. Or lack of usage, even. At best, one receives horribly misspelled texts from someone who doesn't care enough to even check what they have typed. Somehow there was a perfect fit between grey hair, a crisp business suit and the Blackberry; the same cannot be said of an iPhone. It's a mismatch! But sadly, Blackberry did not keep up, and lost the niche that they originally dominated. 

Additionally, small screens are now "out" and bigger, clearer screens are "in", further dating the Apple product. They better have something truly innovative and super cool up their sleeves for iPhone5 or they are going to take a beating, especially from Samsung. The Galaxy SIII will simply not be ignored! There's no need to worry, Apple are massively rich and they can afford any number of hits, but their previous dominance in the mobile marketplace has been eroded of late, and will continue to be. 


There is a greed that often comes with dominance, as evidenced by the US Justice Department's ongoing lawsuit against Apple for alleged price-fixing of e-books: the cost to consumers is estimated to be as much as an additional $100 million. Steve Jobs was heavily implicated in that entire story, and if found to be true, it will be a rather sad footnote to a brilliant career. Even while incredibly rich both personally and corporately, there was a sufficient level of outright greed to screw the public out of even more money? It's shameful if it is the case. 

We will have to wait and see what Apple may have up their sleeves with iPhone5. But you know what? If you are in the market right now for a new superphone, I wouldn't wait. Go get a Samsung Galaxy SIII in your hands: feel it, play with it, test it, and wonder at some of the marvellous deals being offered to allow you to leave the store with one in your hands. You will be smiling! Everyone at Evergreen Umbrella who has joined the Samsung side of life has never looked back. We think you will feel the same way. Why? Simply because, with Samsung Galaxy S, your smartphone experience is the best! - Kevin Mc

How much will that big old white house cost me (this time)?!

American politics never ceases to fascinate, not least because it has become more and more about cash and celebrity, and less and less about politics and issues, at least in the last six months prior to a general election. If you listen to the campaign managers and their moaning, it's only the money that gets you elected. Or kicked out. 

Obamapac got elected in 2008 in what was the costliest presidential campaign in history, with an amount spent in excess of $5 billion by the two candidates, their political parties and various interest groups. Given the state of the country today, it seems almost immoral to spend that kind of money on helping someone to get their dream job. Especially when it's the same guy who wants his contract extended, who will spend even more celebrity cash this time around, and yet he has barely kept some serious promises that got him elected the last time. The economy is in the dumpster, but let's spend another few billion to ensure our quality of life in that big old white house. 

Air Force One has been on quite a tour around the country in recent months, with a particular focus on one high-end piece of airspace real estate: Hollywood. The big O hangin' with his celebrity pals as the minions scurry around the room vacuuming up cash. Hangin' with George and Brad and the boys is way more fun that what poor old Mitt has to do to raise money, right? Another glass of Cristal, George? 

That a campaigner-in-chief who is more in awe of celebrity than is appropriate for a country's leader is not the worst aspect of his moneymaking. In a sense, if he can use them to help him out, fine. Even if the typical middle class family that has been downgraded to working class or even homeless, under his watch, might find his celebrity-hugging antics rather distasteful. It does not add to his credibility regarding how much he cares for and works for Joe Public. 

No, what is the most disingenuous aspect of this is that now that Mitt Romney, perhaps unexpectedly, has become his very own cash cow, hauling in catches in the tens of millions on single days, Obamapac is already crying about it. Mitt raked in over $100 million in June alone, and he has got the boys worried. Obamapac campaign manager Jim Messina even put into print that "if it continues at this pace, it could cost us the election" in an email sent out to push the need for more cash. 

So, are we to conclude that it has got nothing at all to do with what the big O did or did not achieve, or what state the union is in, but simply, how much money is in the bank to publish negative ads on the other guy? This is the impression given. But it's great to see Democrats in a state of panic; there has been way too much cockiness in the Obama camp, who believed the rather lackluster Republican presidential nomination race to be an indicator of their imminent landslide back into the White House. Cue the parties!

"Over the next four months, you will be bombarded with more negative ads. You've got these super PACs, millionaires, billionaires, writing $10 million checks, just pouring, raining down on my head!", says Obama. 


Aww, you poor thing! That's terrible! "Et tu, Brute". Talk about disingenuous, self-centered and misleading! This is the guy who wrote the new rules for presidential fundraising by his decision in 2008 to finance both his primary and general election campaigns via donations from private donors. The inflation in current presidential level fundraising was initiated by him; for others to run against him, they have no choice but to do the same. Yet now that a Republican showed that they can compete on the money, we hear sniffles and bleating from the Democrats. Grow up, boys. You started it. And it's modern politics. So get over it. "Zip it" is a better reaction, than schoolboy-level moaning.  

Don't get me wrong people, I am not saying that the big O is not a decent human being, nor am I saying that I don't think he could or should get re-elected. But I am delighted that it is not going to be a shoe-in, that his gang are now running scared, and they see that there is going to be a fight ahead, if not an all-out war. Given what is at stake, and what state the country is in economically, I truly believe that anyone who wants to get another four years of celebrity-laden parties in the big old white house, needs to roll up their sleeves and godamn fight for it. 

Of course, I would be much happier if the election was totally focused on the issues, and what has gone wrong and needs fixing, rather than how much money has he raised now? The electorate needs to smarten up and vote with their intellect, and not be swayed by any of the nonsense we are all going to be exposed to by both campaigns in the coming months. Intellect, not emotion. 

The young voters who helped get Obama the job last time, have seen his own "celebrity" fade to the level of a mere politician: not the rock star they thought he was in 2008. They need to think about whether they can afford to go to college next year, graduates need to wonder who can help them find jobs instead of lying around their parent's homes after college, and everyone must look to the longer term than just right now. Think, analyze, then vote. 

The depressing job numbers published yesterday are not what Obama wanted, and are precisely the kind of material that Romney will take advantage of, immediately. It's all in the game, and all is fair in love and war. This one classifies way more as war, and if that war forces the realization that the country is sick of seeing their lives and retirement options being eroded, then it's a very good thing. May the best man win. All we can pray for is that this time, the "best" man winning might also actually lead to a "win" for most of those who put him there. Now that's an interesting concept! - Kevin Mc

Sometimes Diamonds are not forever!

As if our faith in investment bankers and their institutions was not already standing on extremely shaky ground, if not actual quicksand, we now see yet another example of outrageous greed raising its ugly head, once more. 

When I heard the amount of the record-breaking fine handed down to Barclays PLC of London, for rigging global interest rates on investments worth about $350 trillion, I knew we had to be talking about something super sleazy. Barclays was fined almost $500 million; that's half a billion dollars, people! Additionally, when you realize that such institutions and their senior executives appear to shrug it off without any action taken, you realize (a) how staggeringly rich they all are, and (b) that the culture of corporate greed in banking has not been diluted by the global financial disaster that began in late 2008.

The behavior of these money-making money-grabbing "professionals" is nauseating, and in many cases, even when caught and exposed, they escape with a slap on the wrist and their bonuses intact. It is disgusting. At least in this very high profile case, heads are rolling. Under mounting political pressure, CEO Bob Diamond (what an interesting surname!) was forced to resign, and he is even under scrutiny to follow through on his stated intent to hand back part or all of his $40-50 million bonus money, if necessary. When questioned on this by a parliamentary committee, he took the equivalent of the fifth, stating that "it would need to discussed by the board". Uh-huh. 

In a move similar to Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan (on which I commented in a past blog), Diamond refused to take the blame, and hoped to ride the stormy waters then go back to his job and business as usual; but he was dreaming. He was followed by Barclays COO Jerry Del Missier on the same day. Speaking of Dimon (Dimon and Diamond, very intriguing!), his position is not that secure apparently, especially given that the actual trading loss that caused his firestorm has now quadrupled since. Some are saying that Dimon either outright lied to regulators and the public, or if he was so ignorant of it, then he is incompetent, and in both cases, he has to go. He's definitely a story to keep an eye on. 

What continues to stun me is the bleating of some of these terminated executives who get a slap on the wrist, and get sent home with all their wealth and a recent bonus and a golden handshake intact. They should go home, lock the doors, count their money and then their blessings. Compared to Joe Public, they are in heaven. They are free, they are rich, they have a retirement mapped out. In my opinion, losing their jobs is not enough. There should be criminal charges that can be laid against the beast of out-and-out greed. Apparently, UK regulators are considering the possibility of filing criminal charges against Barclays, and I think it is necessary as a deterrent. These types care about money, then more money, then tons of money, then ten times more money, and they care not at all about the people whose money they are playing with and putting at risk. 

The image of the banking business was bad enough, and recent scandals after the financial crash and the spotlight that it brought onto the big banks just underline the fact that nothing was learned, and that greed is still alive and well. The beast was double-headed, of course. The greed of bankers, coupled with the greed of "normal" people to live in houses that were four times bigger (and equally as expensive) than needed, with all the trimmings, when they could not afford it, was a major cause of the mess we are all now in. It is an ugly self-serving double-headed beast, and it gorged itself festively. 

The introduction of new complex financial instruments was the red flag that was missed by almost everyone. They are not financial "instruments' in my opinion, they are weapons. They are trickery. Magic. New "tools" for attacking the enemy, other financial institutions, and raping them blind out of vast amounts of money. Don't even bring up "instruments" such as mortgage backed-securities and credit default swaps: they are simply trojan horses with the devastating power of an armored tank. They can literally bring gigantic financial institutions down to the ground, leaving only a pile of bricks and glass and metal sitting on top of the foundations. Even insiders admit that most of the people marketing and selling such complex "instruments" did not even understand them, themselves!

Shed no tears for Bob Diamond, and if Jamie Dimon gets forced out, ditto. Barclays? They are laughing all the way to the (their own) bank, and they could care less. Fire this CEO, bring in that one, do some blah-blah about tight regulation and watchdogs on the board, let the storms fade, then in a year or two when he or she is super cocky and equally rich, he or she will do some dodgy things to make us more money. We will roll with it, then when it comes out, we fire them next. Simple. Functional. Business as usual.    

It is time, dear friends, for criminal charges with the threat of incarceration and loss of one's own wealth to be levied against these financial "criminals", in order for things to be cleaned up. Then again, Bernie Madoff was sent to jail, and nothing much seems to have changed. Money is an addictive drug for such types, methinks, and like a heroin addict, they will step over their best friend or their own mother to get their next fix. Nothing gets in the way, and definitely not emotion or morals. It is a clinical need, arising out of a clinical greed.

In an ironic return to earlier times, cash has once again become a key asset. All the risk and sleaze involved in placing one's money with immoral institutions leaves a bad taste in one's wallet, especially when you might have lost the majority of your retirement savings at the hands of them. This is unforgivable. Maybe it's time to start hiding our wealth where we used to put it: under the mattress?! 

Hmm, all this talk about nasty old money has quite worn me out, I am afraid. I think I will turn over for a power nap, on my new memory foam mattress. It's the new one with the secret compartments for storing one's wealth. Trust me, you sleep so much deeper and way more comfortably knowing that your money is safely in your dreams with you, beneath you. Cash is a much softer cushion than some ever-changing numbers on a computer screen! - Kevin Mc 

Wicked weather, borne on the 4th of July?!

As we exit our own national day and holiday weekend here in Canada, our neighbors to the south are a day away from their big July 4 celebrations. However, the "celebrations" are likely to be muted in certain large sections of the country due to an unforeseen element: the weather!

In a summer scenario that appears to be precisely how scientists predict that global warming will affect the climate and change our lives, extreme weather events have dominated the news in recent weeks. The fact that it has been the weather that has opened the big TV networks breakfast news shows in recent days is either testament to the fact that there is nothing happening in the world, or, rather, that the major story is the weather. For sure, it is the latter!

A milder than usual winter and higher than normal temperatures in spring have played havoc in Colorado, where wildfires have destroyed hundreds of homes and firefighting resources have been stretched to the absolute limit. Many big fireworks displays for July 4 have been cancelled.

With drought covering almost three quarters of the country, and almost 2 million acres of land hit by fires, several states including Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Wisconsin, Illinious, Indiana, Kansas and Missouri are all feeling the heat, and fireworks displays are being cancelled on a daily basis.

In contrast, but adding no less misery into the mix, came the surprise mid-Atlantic derecho storm that hit the eastern states on the weekend that has left about 2 million people without power in sweltering heat, all the way from North Carolina up to New Jersey, and reaching as far west as Illinois. It will be days more before many of these people have their power turned back on, causing havoc to everyone's everyday lives.

There have been 18 deaths attributed to this storm, primarily from trees falling down onto cars or homes, and many are questioning why they did not receive better warnings as to what was heading in their direction. But this derecho, a kind of land-borne hurricane, had elusively built up steam and rather than heading out to the Atlantic as predicted, headed up along the coast wreaking havoc. The derecho phenomenon is a rare one, and we are not quite as good at predicting behavior as we are at other types of storms, it seems. 

Although there will always be naysayers until the planet spontaneously combusts, one just has to invoke the global warming hypothesis into this equation. We are having milder winters, springs sometimes are being missed altogether, and summer temperatures have been erupting as early as mid-March in certain areas of the country. We are living on a warmer planet: one on which we continue to stoke the fires with insufficient regard to our environment, and recent extreme weather crises should howl like raging storms down the corridors of power in Washington. 

The choice is relatively simple. We can go on denying global warming as an issue meritorious of concern, or, we can begin to believe that scientists might know what they are talking about, even if the whole issue is quite naturally an extremely complex one involving many elements and players. 

It's funny how we seem to want to believe the science, when it's convenient for us or even absolutely necessary. When sick or suffering from a disease, we are more than happy to trust science and take those little pills that were developed over many years (usually a decade plus!) by scientists, and prescribed to us by doctors. Having said that, we usually only care about that science when we are already sick!

Ditto global warming and the weather. But the period for saying it's all blah-blah by science types, and we can go on with life as usual because global warming is a myth? It's coming to an end. The crisis has already commenced. 

More than ever before, the weather and it's forecasting is becoming less of an art, and not only more of a science, but also more impacted by science. If we choose to ignore the science of the weather, well, the weather is going to keep on kicking our rear ends when we often least expect it.  

If we can all be a little bit kinder to our environment, the weather beast might have its headaches eradicated and be a lot gentler with us in return. It's a win-win scenario, for us, and for future generations. 

In the spirit of the date, here's hoping that as many people as humanly possible have their lives restored to some kind of normality by tomorrow, or the day after, or the weekend, and get to enjoy what July 4 is often truly about: not so much the date itself, but a celebration of home, family, friends and life itself. - Kevin Mc