Local Therapy Deity!

(Context for the last one: it’s a WWII era sign posted around the soldiers’ washroom mirror, warning them to never discuss military plans in places where civilians could hear them and report back to the enemy, e.g. in restaurants and pubs in the country. “Loose lips sink ships”.)

I also love these two, which I would place in the category of “You already fucked around, now you’re about to find out.”

is how you start to realize that humans respond better to infomation than to instructions

like it was the gorge sign that really clicked this for me:

like the point is, everyone is running their own internal risk assessments when they choose their actions

The original 1990 PSAR (preventative search & rescue) sign "STOP heat kills" warning people that "under no circumstances should you attempt to hide from the rim to the [Colorado] river and back in one day!!"

It's since been updated with several versions now. (I'm excluding the one illustrating a guy vomiting. Gross.) They still mention death, but now the more common phrase is "bottom/down is OPTIONAL, getting back up/to the top is MANDATORY."

They REALLY softened this to "hiking to the river and back in one day is not recommended by the Grand canyon national park." Where before it was: "under no circumstances..."

INTERESTINGLY, I learned the following about why US national parks are soooo concerned with preventative measures which I sort of assumed but didn't know for sure:

Is a park obligated to provide search and rescue? In a 1992 landmark decision, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Johnson v. US Department of the Interior that search and rescue is a “discretionary function” of government that is protected under general rules of exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act at 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a). Mr. Johnson, described as an inexperienced mountain climber, fell to his death on Buck Mountain in Grand Teton National Park. His family subsequently sued the Department of Interior claiming the park failed to properly warn him of the dangers of climbing and failed to initiate a rescue attempt within reasonable time.

The 10th Circuit legally affirmed NPS testimony that “(1) the inherent dangers of mountain climbing are patently obvious; (2) both manpower and economic resources should be conserved … during emergency situations; (3) it would be impractical if not impossible to test competency, monitor equipment use, or ‘clear’ the mountain given limited available manpower and economic resources; and (4) many park visitors value backcountry climbing as one of the few experiences free from government regulation or interference.

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling further clarified a search-and-rescue team’s duty to respond, as follows: "No statute imposes a duty to rescue, nor are there regulations or formal Park Service policies which prescribe a specific course of conduct for search and rescue efforts. Instead, the decision if, when, or how is left to the discretion of the SAR team. Therefore, the rangers must act without reliance upon fixed or readily ascertainable standards when making a search and rescue decision in the field."

NPS preventative success

All those USNPS warnings are partly because there's no duty requiring attempting search and rescue efforts if your ass ends up in trouble inside a park. If the park rangers decide they don't have the resources, or it's too dangerous, or their initial attempts don't work, they have the right to halt efforts or not begin them. Park rangers are good people. When possible, they'll definitely try to rescue you or give you an assist!

In July of 1996, a family of German tourists went missing in Death Valley National Park. It took three months to find their abandoned van, which set off the initial search effort. This search lasted four days and included 45 people, 2 helicopters, and 8 horses. The operation cost around $80,000. Aside from the van, all they found was a single beer bottle that matched others found in the van itself.

Last week, the Trump administration quietly released a sweeping new federal rule that would use funding threats to force institutions across the country to reject transgender people. The 400-page proposed regulation would codify the administration's anti-trans executive orders into binding federal policy, imposing a blanket prohibition on federal funds going toward "gender ideology"

The proposed rule, formally titled "Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance," rewrites the government-wide framework governing all federal grants across every agency. Among its most consequential provisions, it requires that before a federal grant recipient can receive money, the award must pass a "pre-issuance review" conducted by a political appointee—not a career expert or peer reviewer—to ensure it is "consistent with applicable law, Federal agency priorities, and the national interest." The regulation explicitly instructs these appointees to screen for "denial by the recipient of the sex binary in humans or the notion that sex is a chosen or mutable characteristic." [...] An institution that acknowledges transgender people exist—through its policies, its training, its healthcare, its bathroom access, its HR procedures, its name-change processes—could be deemed to "deny the sex binary" or to “support the notion that sex is mutable” and have its federal funding blocked.

This torches everything. And I do mean everything.

A very abbreviated list of its ramifications include (but are not limited to):

ending funding for ALL DEI related initiatives

allowing the government to terminate grants at any point for any reason

preventing researchers from publishing, going to conferences, and being part of academic societies

requiring that topics must support the president’s agenda.

What this means, and if anything I’m under selling it, is the death of science and research in America. It allows the government to restrict any topic they please at a whims notice, putting officials who have no background in the topic in charge of deciding funding continuity. It controls what gets researched and if/how researchers are allowed to share their discoveries. There are no books to burn if the government never allows them to be written. This is fascism plain and simple.