Existential Issues w/Model Railroading

[ben10ben]

Chip,

Would you mind to reference the specific article? I'd like to read it for myself.

Thanks,
Ben

[SpaceMouse]

As Crandell mentioned, we have to include higher levels of toxins, and literally hundreds of thousands of toxins that did not exist as recently as WWII. Plus we have to factor that US residents take the largest doses and most variety of toxic drugs (by definition prescription drugs are toxic.)  

"The dose makes the poison" 

Everything is toxic in some amount. So, yes, prescription drugs are toxic, but then so are vitamins, minerals, vegatables(even "organic" ones), and water. 

Overall, I think that the good which modern medicine has done far outweighs any potentially harmful effects which may result from their misuse. 

And yet as of 2005, according to the Journal of the American Medical Association death by properly prescribed drugs is now the third leading cause of death in the US behind cancer and heart disease. And an additional 2 million people are seriously wounded every year by properly prescribed drugs.

Edit: You're right, Phil sorry.

[shayfan84325]

As Crandell mentioned, we have to include higher levels of toxins, and literally hundreds of thousands of toxins that did not exist as recently as WWII. Plus we have to factor that US residents take the largest doses and most variety of toxic drugs (by definition prescription drugs are toxic.)  

"The dose makes the poison" 

Everything is toxic in some amount. So, yes, prescription drugs are toxic, but then so are vitamins, minerals, vegatables(even "organic" ones), and water. 

Overall, I think that the good which modern medicine has done far outweighs any potentially harmful effects which may result from their misuse. 

[ben10ben]

As Crandell mentioned, we have to include higher levels of toxins, and literally hundreds of thousands of toxins that did not exist as recently as WWII. Plus we have to factor that US residents take the largest doses and most variety of toxic drugs (by definition prescription drugs are toxic.)  

"The dose makes the poison" 

Everything is toxic in some amount. So, yes, prescription drugs are toxic, but then so are vitamins, minerals, vegatables(even "organic" ones), and water. 

Overall, I think that the good which modern medicine has done far outweighs any potentially harmful effects which may result from their misuse. 

[Lillen]

There was a big war that killed 40 million people between 1914 and 1918 and it started in Sarajevo, now part of Bosnia-Herzegovina when a Bosnian Serb assasinated the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Ferdidand.

Historical lessons indeed.

 

Hi Dave,

 

I just needed to correct this. 40 million people did not die during WWI, the dead is usually estimated between 13,5 and up to about 15 million or so(Not including civilians). Now, some people like to ad the effects of the war to what is know as the Spanish disease and ad their deaths as well but that did not occur during the time frame that you mentioned. It's also hard to justify it as a monocausal reason.

 

I guess that you are mistaking casualties for dead which is not the same as I'm sure that you know considering your background. Civilians are also very hard to estimate.

 

One last thing, the name is spelled Ferdinand but I would guess that it's just a typo.

 

Please do not take this the wrong way. I just read something that I thought was better corrected consider history lessons and all.

[SpaceMouse]

Add to that the average lifespan of a person who survives to the age of thirty has not varied more that +/- 4 years since the revolutionary war (with the longest lifespan at the turn of the 20th century), and the accident theory goes out the window.

Dude, you've got to be kidding. Maybe you make your living selling new age tinctures and potions to people, but this is just completely upside down. We can all tell from looking at the people around us that people are generally living longer.

Info derived from the US census

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html

shows that average life expectancy at age 30 in 1900 was 34.88 years for white males. In 2004 it was 47.3 years. Increased nearly 12 years or 35%.

The source I have starts to vary from yours in about 1947, but having checked this data, I will concede that I am in error.

However, upon further investigation it is not the US census that the info was derived but the Department of Health and Human Services. Live expectancy reported by the US census also refers to this data, but only goes back to 1979 in their 2008 report.  

 

[Dave Vollmer]

Unfortunately things like the Jim Crowe laws, the Holocaust, slavery, etc. can never be viewed completely objectively because so much emotion is inextricably connected to them.  In fact, they are so emotionally charged that attempting to discuss them objectively usually ends up in accusations of "de-humanizing" and "trivializing" them.

It's too bad, too, because it's only through objective analysis that the true root causes of these events can be understood in such a manner as to prevent them from ever happening again.

I served in Bosnia as a peacekeeper following the Dayton Peace Accords, and I can tell you those people had a terribly distorted sense of their own history.  There were essentailly three sides in that war: ethnic Serbs, ethnic Croats, and Bosniac Muslims.  And each side viewed history in such a way that they were the victims of hundreds of years of oppression and the other two sides were the oppressors.  The true historical record tends to spread the blame across all three sides fairly evenly.

Without objective analysis leading to understanding of the economic and political causes of that war (it only became about religion when the leaders on each side needed a reason to rally their own ethnic groups), I fear that part of the world is still ripe for future conflict.  We've already seen it happening in Kosovo recently.

There was a big war that killed 40 million people between 1914 and 1918 and it started in Sarajevo, now part of Bosnia-Herzegovina when a Bosnian Serb assasinated the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Ferdidand.

Historical lessons indeed.

Oh yeah, I forgot.

Trains.  They're really... the way... to go.  Yeah.  I like trains.

[garya]

Which states had the Jim Crow laws? Any B&O towns that would have been effected?

 

Magnus

Maryland, for one.  Virginia, too.  That's quite a bit of the B&O.

Trains had article a few years ago titled "When Jim Crow Rode the Rails."  Recommended reading.  Amusingly enough, a letter in a subsequent issue accused Trains and the author of "Political Correctness".  Apparently pretending something never existed is Political Correctness; drawing attention to it is as well.

Plessy v. Ferguson, the separate but equal Supreme court ruling, had to do with a man who refused to sit in a "colored" railroad car. 

 

[alco_fan]

Yet at the same time, that average old age has gone down from the high 80's- low 90's to about 75. We are not living longer. In fact, just the opposite. Just more of us are making it to old age. These are not official statistics, just my personel opinion based on my observation while doing my other hobby, genealogy.

Yes, of course. Your personal opinions are _much more_ accurate than data from the US census bureau. Bottom line, the census figures are clear, if you make it to age 30 in the US, you live longer today than ever in history. It's amazing that anybody would even argue this, but I should have known better than to critique the forum deity's pronouncements.

[IRONROOSTER]

Personally, as much as I know graffiti is a part of the modern railroading scene, I don't get any pleasure out of including it in my scenery or on my rolling stock, so I don't.  One of the reasons I settled on the late 60's for my modeled era is the blissful lack of that sort of vandalism, at least on railroad property.

I strive for a level of accuracy in my modeling, but I'm not writing a doctoral thesis, I'm building a layout.

Lee 

...

For me, the graffiti is just an eyesore and why would I model something I consider to be ugly on my model railroad that I am building for my pleasure? No one is jumping up and down at my door wanting to know "what happened to the graffiti" on my rail cars ...

I like the rules of model railroading, and they go something like this:

RULE 1. It's my railroad.

RULE 2. If you have any other questions, see rule 1. 

I agree.  I also don't like litter and dirt so I leave those out too. 

Enjoy

Paul 

[snagletooth]

Add to that the average lifespan of a person who survives to the age of thirty has not varied more that +/- 4 years since the revolutionary war (with the longest lifespan at the turn of the 20th century), and the accident theory goes out the window.

Dude, you've got to be kidding. Maybe you make your living selling new age tinctures and potions to people, but this is just completely upside down. We can all tell from looking at the people around us that people are generally living longer.

Info derived from the US census

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html

shows that average life expectancy at age 30 in 1900 was 34.88 years for white males. In 2004 it was 47.3 years. Increased nearly 12 years or 35%.

Those statistics are misleading. we're not living longer, just more of us are reaching old age. Just take a walk thru any graveyard. at the turn of the century  (1800's to 1900's) most headstones show (to me, anyway.) that either you died very young, or lived very long life. Most headstones I've seen from that period, the vast majority are infants and people 80+, and many pushing 100+. Look at newer headstones (WWII to present), you see much fewer infants and 80+, and alot of 60-75 year olds.

The conclusion I've come to is that infant mortality is down greatly, which hugely increases our chances of reaching old age. Yet at the same time, that average old age has gone down from the high 80's- low 90's to about 75. We are not living longer. In fact, just the opposite. Just more of us are making it to old age. These are not official statistics, just my personel opinion based on my observation while doing my other hobby, genealogy.

And just to keep this on topic, here:

[Lillen]

Which states had the Jim Crow laws? Any B&O towns that would have been effected?

 

Magnus

[Heartland Division CB&Q]

At least this thread has some value becuase it served as a good thought starter based up many posts to it.

Still, however, I wonder about the intent for the original thread. It was stated that there may be a "dark side" to our hobby. That comment bothers me, and it strikes me as an untruth. The World's Greatest Hobby is about as wholesome as any pastime could get. In this forum, there are many young people who I would be proud to have in my family who are learning skills and habits that will be good for them in their future years.

Perhaps, I wonder, model railroading is too good for our youth according to a certain group of people. Such people may attack our hobby as they attacked Boy Scouts. Some of the fellow model railroaders are faithful people including some who are pastors.  The groups who attack boys scouts and churches may as well attack the wholesome hobbies, too. Then the kids can go back to watching trash "entertainment" that encourages shameful behavior.

So, it's been good reading posts from many forum members who are setting the record straight.  My compliments to all the good people who dominate our great hobby!

 

[wm3798]

Busted!

The Off Topic Police 

[alco_fan]

Add to that the average lifespan of a person who survives to the age of thirty has not varied more that +/- 4 years since the revolutionary war (with the longest lifespan at the turn of the 20th century), and the accident theory goes out the window.

Dude, you've got to be kidding. Maybe you make your living selling new age tinctures and potions to people, but this is just completely upside down. We can all tell from looking at the people around us that people are generally living longer.

Info derived from the US census

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html

shows that average life expectancy at age 30 in 1900 was 34.88 years for white males. In 2004 it was 47.3 years. Increased nearly 12 years or 35%.

[Lillen]

Magnus and Crandell,

I was not implying that food was the prime source of old-age disease. I was just offering it as an alternative to the lack of accidents as the reason we live longer and get old-age disease. As Crandell mentioned, we have to include higher levels of toxins, and literally hundreds of thousands of toxins that did not exist as recently as WWII. Plus we have to factor that US residents take the largest doses and most variety of toxic drugs (by definition prescription drugs are toxic.)  

And your right Magnus, eliminating 16-29 year-old males does eliminate the people most likely to die from accidents--which was the point. If you eliminate accidents, the longest life-span in the US was in the 1900 time frame. Now this may be different in your area because unlike your country, our country ranks 37th in health care in industrialized nations, right behind Costa Rica. But at least in our country, people aren't living longer than ever before.  

 

Chip,

 

Then we are in agreement. I think we are all concerned about the bad food and toxins. I live very eco friendly. I know that I try to give my kids healthier foods but it ain't easy. The peaches I mentioned, some brands of mashed peaches contained something 37% sugar! That is scary. Lucky enough I was aware of the issue and read the declaration on all bottles.

Sweden have very good health care, although one should not believe in a certain movie about how it is in europe with socialized medicine. We have to wait for it but it in universal. But things are changing since the aging population(we are getting a lot older) makes it hard to keep up. Sweden is one of the countries in the world that live the longest.

An interesting thing is that the level of lethal violence, a common cause of death for certain segments of the population was the least in between the two world wars and have increased internationally ever since.  

I do not either believe either that accidents alone explains it and it was never my intention to put it like that if that is how you read it. I believe it is a big and complex puzzle.

But I still say that we actually are living longer in general through out the industrialized world and actually the world in general with a couple of exceptions mainly in sub Saharan Africa. 

 

I really like it when we can have these civilized discussion, they make this forum great.

 

Magnus

 

 

[SpaceMouse]

Magnus and Crandell,

I was not implying that food was the prime source of old-age disease. I was just offering it as an alternative to the lack of accidents as the reason we live longer and get old-age disease. As Crandell mentioned, we have to include higher levels of toxins, and literally hundreds of thousands of toxins that did not exist as recently as WWII. Plus we have to factor that US residents take the largest doses and most variety of toxic drugs (by definition prescription drugs are toxic.)  

And your right Magnus, eliminating 16-29 year-old males does eliminate the people most likely to die from accidents--which was the point. If you eliminate accidents, the longest life-span in the US was in the 1900 time frame. Now this may be different in your area because unlike your country, our country ranks 37th in health care in industrialized nations, right behind Costa Rica. But at least in our country, people aren't living longer than ever before.  

[Dave Vollmer]

It all goes back to what one's modeling objectives are.

Gritty realism or the way we wish it was?

Heck, I model central PA in the summer of 1956.  There were coal miner's strikes all over PA that year.  But my mine is operating.  Why?  Not because I'm sanitizing history.  But because a miner's strike would muddle and confuse the somewhat simple picture I'm trying to project of the industrialized East.  The miner's strikes are a part of that history, of course...  But the hoppers would stand empty, wouldn't they?  No fun for ops.

I chose 1956 for a number of reasons owing to types of equipment used, types of operations, and a wide array of photographic resources specific to 1956 on the PRR.  That miner's strikes were occurring that summer is more of a nuisance than an asset in choice of era.  Plus, not all of the mines were striking at the same time, nor were they striking all summer long.

Plus, every day on my layout is bright and sunny, and although it's summer, it's not oppressively hot.  Typical PA summer days are hazy, but on my layout it's one of the few clear days you get after the occasional summer cold front.  Why?  Because until I add a backdrop there's no way to effectively convey a sense of haze.

I also can't really model the fact that the PRR had begun to hemmorage red ink by 1956.  The weedy sidings at the mine and in town are the only visible evidence on the layout that maintenance was starting to suffer in order to keep stock dividends flowing.

I hope nobody thought I was calling them a "hypocrite" for not modeling every last dirty detail.  That statement was more geared toward the hostorical revisionists whose strategy of dealing with unpleasant history is either to ignore it or to assign heaping helpings of blame.

At some point as we become seperated by generations from history's blemishes, we have to stop blamestorming and start understanding the whys and the hows.  History is more than who and whats.  It's the hows and whys that we need to understand in order to keep the bad stuff rom happening again.

For those whose layouts are a refuge from the real world, I understand completely.  After I got back from Iraq my layout was a similar refuge.  No al Qaeda in central PA in 1956, that's for sure!

But I would add this:  Not modeling something doesn't necessarily mean you're ignoring it, and modeling something unpleasant does not imply endorsement of same.  It's all about objectives.

[wm3798]

I'm getting fat because beer is good!  Food don't enter into it!

Lee 

[Lillen]

On the subject of nutrition, I think it is simplistic to attribute the cause to a given condition or circumstance to one thing only.  The human body is a system, as is our way of living and nurturing it.  How do you account, for example, for prescribed medications, whether done by the body's owner or someone else?  How do we account for the multitudes of culturally induced nutrition or lack thereof?  What other toxicities are prevalent from place to place that might inhibit absorption, or its utility after it does manage to get into the blood for the body's use?

I don't mean to discount warnings about genetically modified foodstuffs, and certainly not for the manufactured and processed foods.  I do agree that they are largely problematic if for no other reason than that they have too much salt, fat, and sugar added to them to encourage youth to enjoy them and become reliant on them and their convenience.  As an example, look to the shelves in grocery stores and marvel at the plenitude of soft drinks that add nothing but an expense and offer nothing of substance except the promise of obesity and diabetes....and tooth decay with all its associated problems for good nutrition (how do you absorb nutrients when you can't really chew your food in a decent range of food choices?)

We pump hormones into our food, feed anti-bacterial medications to chickens and livestock so that they don't get sick and we feed them hormones to make them grow more quickly to get them to market.  We are right to be worried about the deleterious effects from those practices.

 

-Crandell

 

I agree with everything above. Our food is not good and their is a clear problem with the fact that we are getting fatter.

 

Your first point is something historians call monocausal and it's very rare that any explanation will be truly monocausal. I think a lot of things effect us through out our lives and it is hard to pinpoint and exact thing that is the root of all ailments.

 

Popular media is often quick to latch on to any monocausal theory unfortunately which I believe is causing a bit of a problem.

 

Magnus

[selector]

As in all human pursuits, whether playing soccer, dancing, painting, writing, doing research, and even our multiple variations of modeling, there is room for the expressive, the trivial, and the sincere.

Let's take art.  Sixteenth century Dutch artists were well known for their brand of painting, if it can be called that...maybe style?  The Bible figured very prominently in puritanical and catholic homes back then, and the great artists often resorted to biblical themes.  The dark side of humanity, if you will, was invoked often in the painting of skulls in a corner of the painting.  The realistic side of the human condition was always very much evident in what the artist wanted to portray.

If we want to actually "model", then we have to account for any deviations from what others will note or take for fact when we present our "model" to them.  This happens all the time on a recently launched thread where inconsistencies are meant to be pointed out.  These are inconsistencies not only with details that can be seen, but also in the way the details are provided or rendered.  For example, a boxcar can be highly detailed, but if it is merely placed in the middle of a well weathered consist without any added weathering of its own, it will stand out.

So, it seems to me that if one wants to incorporate a certain fidelity to what the eye is likely to take in when viewing the natural scene and prototype, one is bound to offer a rendering of that fidelity to himself if not to the viewer..as his skills and eyes permit.  IOW, it is incumbent upon the creator of David to make David look credible and realistic.  David is comprised of bright marble, but you get the idea.  A boxcar is also a boxcar because we get the idea.  But it doesn't become a "realistic" boxcar in the middle of a carefully dirtied bunch of other rolling stock.  Context really is everything in "modeling".

On the subject of nutrition, I think it is simplistic to attribute the cause to a given condition or circumstance to one thing only.  The human body is a system, as is our way of living and nurturing it.  How do you account, for example, for prescribed medications, whether done by the body's owner or someone else?  How do we account for the multitudes of culturally induced nutrition or lack thereof?  What other toxicities are prevalent from place to place that might inhibit absorption, or its utility after it does manage to get into the blood for the body's use?

I don't mean to discount warnings about genetically modified foodstuffs, and certainly not for the manufactured and processed foods.  I do agree that they are largely problematic if for no other reason than that they have too much salt, fat, and sugar added to them to encourage youth to enjoy them and become reliant on them and their convenience.  As an example, look to the shelves in grocery stores and marvel at the plenitude of soft drinks that add nothing but an expense and offer nothing of substance except the promise of obesity and diabetes....and tooth decay with all its associated problems for good nutrition (how do you absorb nutrients when you can't really chew your food in a decent range of food choices?)

We pump hormones into our food, feed anti-bacterial medications to chickens and livestock so that they don't get sick and we feed them hormones to make them grow more quickly to get them to market.  We are right to be worried about the deleterious effects from those practices.

To close, if one models the present, and wishes to be known for great modelling, then it lies in the details....including the macabre, sophisticated, mundane, arcane, and the merely expressive.  If a building has a front porch with a torn up plank, it had better look like it in the model.  If rolling stock has graffiti, so must the modeller's.  If one wants to model mining, it must be a credible model, and that means all the glorious and the execrable aspects of mining...or war.

-Crandell

[Lillen]

 

I like the rules of model railroading, and they go something like this:

RULE 1. It's my railroad.

RULE 2. If you have any other questions, see rule 1. 

 

This is something that we should all strive to remember and to try to push our own limited visions on to others.

 

Magnus

[shayfan84325]

I don't think we'll be seeing any articles in MR about modeling Jim Crowe waiting rooms or Nazi death camp trains.

Personally, as much as I know graffiti is a part of the modern railroading scene, I don't get any pleasure out of including it in my scenery or on my rolling stock, so I don't.  One of the reasons I settled on the late 60's for my modeled era is the blissful lack of that sort of vandalism, at least on railroad property.

I model a coal hauler, have studied the mining industry, and visited several excellent museums and historic sites on the subject.  It's fascinating stuff.  I like to think of my models as a tribute to the industry, and to the railroads that served it. 

I strive for a level of accuracy in my modeling, but I'm not writing a doctoral thesis, I'm building a layout.

Lee 

I feel the same about modeling other bits of society's ugliness - I just leave them out.  At the same time I respect what Dave and others have said about historical accuracy, so where do we draw the line?

Having given it some thought, I think the line exists where technology ends and social behavior begins.  It appears that most of us are pretty accurate when it comes to technological history (we have the right machinery on our layouts for the periods we model), but we feel free to do a little editing when it comes to society.  The result is an accurate representation of technology for a time-frame, with a little prettier backdrop when it comes to the people who populate our little worlds.

My 1930s era layout has no evidence of racial segregation, the Depression, or the unfair treatment of women that existed in the '30s - and I completely agree with Lee's decision to omit graffiti.  I don't think we have a case of "rose-colored glasses" - if anyone knows how the world really looks it would be model railroaders (attention to our prototypes is part of our affliction).  I think we do it to keep the social mess from detracting from our own joy and from the real point of our hobby - the trains.  I'd be interested to know how others have spruced up society on their layouts.

[jfugate]

Personally, as much as I know graffiti is a part of the modern railroading scene, I don't get any pleasure out of including it in my scenery or on my rolling stock, so I don't.  One of the reasons I settled on the late 60's for my modeled era is the blissful lack of that sort of vandalism, at least on railroad property.

I strive for a level of accuracy in my modeling, but I'm not writing a doctoral thesis, I'm building a layout.

Lee 

Lee:

I agree 100%. As I mentioned earlier, the LD SIG has discussed this issue, and they frame the question as: "do you model the way it really was, or do you model the way you wish it had been?"

Either answer is valid, by the way.

For me, the graffiti is just an eyesore and why would I model something I consider to be ugly on my model railroad that I am building for my pleasure? No one is jumping up and down at my door wanting to know "what happened to the graffiti" on my rail cars ...

I like the rules of model railroading, and they go something like this:

RULE 1. It's my railroad.

RULE 2. If you have any other questions, see rule 1. 

[Lillen]

It could also be that the nutrient value of our food has decreased 10% per decade since WWII with the onset of genetic engineering. A recent Cambridge study showed that in now takes 53 peaches to equal the nutritional content of two peaches in the 1953 study. Combine that with fast foods and processed foods and you have what I think, is a more likely receipt for old age sickness.  

Add to that the average lifespan of a person who survives to the age of thirty has not varied more that +/- 4 years since the revolutionary war (with the longest lifespan at the turn of the 20th century), and the accident theory goes out the window.

What most people look at is average lifespan from birth. The rate of infant mortality has decreased significantly in recent history and so that skews the average a lot. Of course, the average from birth is what the proponents our health care paradigm like to tout.

History is always revised by those in power.   

 

Hi Spacemouse. You have a valid point. Nutrition have gone down for example. But lets not romance the past to much. How many peaches did an average New Yorker, Canadian or Alaska eat during a year? Their is a tendency to make the past seem like a great time.

 

Infant mortality is important, they do as you say skew the statistics a LOT. As you say. But if you remove as you do men in between the ages of 16-29 you also remove the group most likely to be killed by accidents and violence. Check out the murder rate for good old NYC in the 1800's? By not allowing them in the statistic you skew them a lot! The good old time was a violent place and men in the ages of 16-45 was the major culprits(as they are today but violence is way down today)

Another thing to keep in mind, when did the average woman give birth during the good old time? Before thirty as you know. What was one of the biggest cause of death of young women? Well they died giving birth, often before thirty years of age, but they are not in your statistics.

 

So while you are right in many ways, removing the group of people most likely to die at an early stage from the statistics they do get skewed. Where to make the cut off? Well that depends on what you want to prove. Children today gets more nutrition then their counterparts in the golden days and there for survive. It's complicated that is all I saying. My kids ate peaches when they where small, those peaches where not available up here in the past.

Their is also one more thing I can recommend thinking about. What did people die from when they where no illness with that name? basically, if you are unable to give a diagnosis, their is no Alzheimer's disease how can we expect to find records of people dying from the newly discovered diseases? We said that people became loony, not alzheimer's and so on. I can recommend reading for example Foucault's book of the history of insanity for example.

 

So we can use statistics all we want to prove our points. The bottomline is that we do live longer then ever before.

 

 

Magnus 

  

 

[wm3798]

I don't think we'll be seeing any articles in MR about modeling Jim Crowe waiting rooms or Nazi death camp trains.

Personally, as much as I know graffiti is a part of the modern railroading scene, I don't get any pleasure out of including it in my scenery or on my rolling stock, so I don't.  One of the reasons I settled on the late 60's for my modeled era is the blissful lack of that sort of vandalism, at least on railroad property.

I model a coal hauler, have studied the mining industry, and visited several excellent museums and historic sites on the subject.  It's fascinating stuff.  I like to think of my models as a tribute to the industry, and to the railroads that served it. 

I strive for a level of accuracy in my modeling, but I'm not writing a doctoral thesis, I'm building a layout.

Lee 

[last mountain & eastern hogger]

Joe Fugate,  Dave Vollmer,  Alfred E. Newman --You're da men.........

Great thread

Johnboy out...............

[vsmith]

Very interesting topic, so far its been pretty civil so I dont see why it would get nuked.

My 2cents? Coal mining is not PC? Heck if you think about almost the entire history of the RAILROADS isnt anywhere near PC, just where do you think we got the phrase "Robber Baron" from?

RRs have a long history of corruption, power and land grabs, safety violations, violent labor disputes, etc etc...suffice to say if one is having that kind of emotional turmoil over the history of the subject hobby, I personally think thats being just tad bit too sensitive?

I model a mining railroad set in the late 1930's , where Safety is just a word in the dictionary, Why? why not, if one of my labor employees falls off the mountain and down into a gully, I just pick him up, dust him off and put him back on the side of the mountain cause you cant kill plastic.

I'm able to seperate rather deplorable real life history from my enjoyment of a HOBBY . PS I used to model sailing ships of the age of exploration, 14th century thru the 16th century, now you want to talk about deplorable and horrendous conditions? Horribly bloody battles? gruesome deaths by cannonshot and desease? Yes, but the SHIPS were SO COOL to model. So I have no problems with coal mines, steel mills logging camps, heck - someone should model a nuclear power plant because its a fantastic modeling opportunty (especially the small flourescent lamp inside the plant)

PS to quote Will Rogers, I belong to no organized political party, I am a Democrat.

[SpaceMouse]

[

 One reason that more people succumb to heart disease and cancer is that more people live long enough to have them develop, rather than dying young through work-related misadventure or occupational malady. 

This is a very important point. We are always hearing on the news how hear diseases, cancer and so on is killing people and more people are sick now a days with a lot of diseases that comes with age. Well, a 100 years ago we died before we got the opportunity to get these diseases and to actually die from them. We are also actually able to diagnose them now unlike in the past. The glorious past when people died young and every one was able to scratch build their own engines and the hobby was growing like an oak.

 

Magnus

It could also be that the nutrient value of our food has decreased 10% per decade since WWII with the onset of genetic engineering. A recent Cambridge study showed that in now takes 53 peaches to equal the nutritional content of two peaches in the 1953 study. Combine that with fast foods and processed foods and you have what I think, is a more likely receipt for old age sickness.  

Add to that the average lifespan of a person who survives to the age of thirty has not varied more that +/- 4 years since the revolutionary war (with the longest lifespan at the turn of the 20th century), and the accident theory goes out the window.

What most people look at is average lifespan from birth. The rate of infant mortality has decreased significantly in recent history and so that skews the average a lot. Of course, the average from birth is what the proponents our health care paradigm like to tout.

History is always revised by those in power.   

[Trynn_Allen2]

Without complete history, our identity is lost.  So it is with our model railroads, if we wish them to represent or even resemble the real thing.

---long paragraph deleted---

On a side note: My sister lives in Mississippi now, and with her very obvious northern accent often gets asked (and told) which side her family fought on.  Her response was thus and it stunned the audience in question. 

"So your family fought for the North?"

"No, My family fought for all three sides, the North, the South and for himself.  My great, great grandfather took the Union for all it was worth and then took the South for all it was worth.  He was an equal oppurtunity bigot and businessman.  It was just a shame he was a better bigot than he was a businessman."

"Ummm..."

Which just goes to show that there is a way to end North South debates that don't end in raging fist fights.

I've lived south of the Mason-Dixon line several times, most recently a long stay in Tennessee, and have also been asked which side my forebears fought on.  When I told the questioners that I think they were fighting for the Kaiser because they despised all things French all I get is stupid looks.  Seems that they never heard of the Franco-Prussian War, and are totally oblivious to the fact that Blucher's appearance was a significant contribution to Wellington's victory over Buonaparte at Waterloo...

The earliest date that any of my ancestors came through Ellis Island was 1883.  The last arrived in 1912.  My children and grandchildren can extend that to 1960, and Honolulu...

---paragraph clipped--- 

My attitude?  To quote Alfred E. Newman, "What, me worry?"

Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)

 

So is it sad to say that one side of the family fled the Kaisers war only to end fighting in the Civil War...