I Need the WHY!

?u=http3.bp.blogspot.com-CIl2VSm-mmgTZ0wMvH5UGIAAAAAAAAB20QA9_IiyVhYss1600showme_board3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1By now, the entire world knows the who, as in the central characters in the farrago and cheap Kabuki Theater that has been our lives since 2020.  The list of nefarious and detestable characters leads only to politicization, chaos, and right now, the names of these characters need no further introduction.  I will not name these repugnant rapscallions any longer.

We are fully clear on the where, as in, we know the whereabouts of how this global Kabuki-Style charade originated.  Frankly, unless the consequences include the “Ryan Doctrine” and an entirely new government in China, additional discussion is moot at this point.  If you are unfamiliar with the “Ryan Doctrine;” it is a reference to John Patrick Ryan, the fictional character from Tom Clancy’s books, who claimed that if it is okay to send some 19-year-old kid to war, the political leaders are fair game, as much as that poor-kid ordered into battle.  Long have I supported this belief, having served in the US Army and the US Navy, listening to the political hosts banging the drums of war against Russia.  I am fully on board with the political leaders being in the same boat as the kids whose lives they are throwing away.

The what at this point is pretty simple; COVID-19 is a virus that was experimented into being through “gain of function” research.  As Senator Dr. Rand Paul has discussed ad nauseum ad infinitum with Dr. Anthony Fauci, the gain of function research scientists take a virus found in nature and make that virus more deadly and transmissible in a laboratory for human endangerment.  While the NIH continues to play “find the pea” games with the definition of gain of function, the simple version is stated and sufficient to my purposes.Knowledge Check!

The how is also pretty clear by now; the inability to close human interactions at the beginning of this virus debacle has led to the deaths of many people.  Human interactions are the number one problem in stopping the spread of any airborne, highly transmissible virus.  From the flu to pneumonia, and from SARS to MERS (two highly contagious and lethal upper respiratory viruses), and all the diseases in between, humans interacting is both the cure and the problem.  The problem, these viral diseases are spread through the air, and we share a lot of air between people.  The cure because sharing the virus, in its many variations, is how immunity in populations is increased.

Let me pause here for a moment.  Let’s talk about risk.  The risks you choose to onboard are how you build a life.  My risk tolerance is different from your risk tolerance, and while we might share some levels in our risk tolerances, we will be different, and in being different, we choose what to be exposed to, how, when, where, and why.  Humans have been making and exercising this freedom since the days of Adam and Eve and will continue to make this choice, without, and sometimes with, government boots on necks.

Where you set, your risk tolerances are choices, where you as an individual are exercising your moral agency.  These choices come with natural consequences.  For the government to interject and impose themselves into your risk tolerance decisions is immoral, unethical, and according to the US Constitution, illegal and illicit actions, and not only under the first amendment.  Please see my other articles on the topic for a more in-depth review of the US Constitution.

QuestionAs we have experienced these last two years, the when is pretty apparent, and restating more on when is wildly redundant.  However, since the Internet is forever, let me only stipulate the government has been running amok since 2000.  The gain in government over liberties, rights, and freedoms in the populations with representative government has only sharply increased since 2020.  It remains imperative that government from the city to the Presidential office needs serious reprimanding, shrinking, and curtailing!

Repeating only for emphasis, I need the WHY!  Why were all the pre-pandemic plans, government exercises, and 200-years of research in basic virology and virus management thrown away during this COVID-Kabuki?  Why have so many bureaucrats become rich, famous, and hailed as “the science” when basic science has been ignored, shunted to the side, and criticized?  Science is constantly debated, doubted, discussed, and repeatedly tested in a research laboratory and the real world.  Physics leaders debate gravity; medical researchers are always learning something new, reporting something new, and then testing the new to prove it has worth and value for study and learning.  Every field of science is learning through testing, re-testing, discovery, debate, and discussion of doubts.

Yet, for the last two years, all doubting of published, and heavily politicalized science, has been squashed by the thumb of government, and I need to know WHY!  Drugs helpful in treating the flu were refused for COVID, even though previous studies, done by the big names in the NIH, were politicalized, pushed out, and refused to people suffering; why?  Masks were mandated, even though every manufacturer is forced, by legislation, to admit these masks do no good in stopping viral particulate from entering the mask.  The body of research is growing discussing the efficacy of wearing masks during surgery and reflects that those wearing masks harm the patients’ undergoing procedures from doctors and nurses wearing the mask, increasing the potential for sepsis post-procedure.The Duty of Americans

Why are patients harmed; the mask was ONLY ever intended to help curb droplets of bacteria born from the mouth and nose of the medical personnel from dropping into the wounds and surgical area of the patient until new technology could be derived.  Follow the history of masks from cotton to paper and reusable to disposable, and you the truth is obvious.  Research is being conducted on the germ storm created on the front or outside of the mask that the doctor is then blowing onto the patient’s wounds.  Basic science can logically explain and expound upon this topic.  Unfortunately, as what occurred in 1846 to Doctor Ignaz Semmelweis, those with political power and a modicum of medical training are treating those discussing, debating, and doubting established “science” wickedly and immorally, while pointedly refusing and trying to dispel everyone who disagrees.

By the way, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was the doctor who championed hand washing and cleaning instruments between patients with a chlorine solution.  Consider medical treatment today; how many of you want your doctor or nurse not to wash their hands between patients?  Wear gloves?  And have ready access to sterilized medical instruments?  Another hot topic in hospital safety is pharmaceutical-resistant bacteria, viruses, and easily transmissible diseases in hospitals.  Want a topic to scare the hell out of you; read any paper on the problems with controlling sepsis, an easily spread illness for any patient having a medical procedure, where droplets of bacteria drop into the wound, sometimes from the masks of those performing the procedure.

Frankly, I prefer to see medical personnel in face shields rather than masks.  It is easier to hear the medical professional, the face shield is easily cleaned with alcohol one-time use swabs/pads, and I can listen to the doctor/nurse.  Plus, the same droplet control is achieved without the danger of passing droplets of bacteria into an open wound by surgical and medical personnel.  Upon looking at the research on masks endangering patients, how many medical professionals will switch to face shields and away from masks voluntarily?  Well, Dr. Semmelweis’ history shows us the answer is less than zero!  Why does history repeat itself so often; many people refuse to learn history to avoid repeating history.  But the real reason is that people with power refuse to listen to those with ideas and no power.  Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis died of the same disease he fought in maternity wards, sepsis (previously known as childbed fever).

VaccineWant to really be freaked out, scared into mental distress; read what the CDC reports on hand hygiene in hospitals and doctor’s clinics.  Very few medical professionals adhere to hand hygiene protocols to the detriment of the patient!  Yet, since 1846, almost 200-years, hand hygiene has been known as the best course of action to prevent spreading diseases, except the number one reason doctors and nurses don’t wash their hands is their personal beliefs.  I want to know why medical professionals, who are supposed to be embedded in learning and discovery, refuse simple science when it stares them in the face, resist common sense and logic, and inflate their egos when questions are asked.  Ever ask a doctor or nurse when the last time they washed their hands?  I was threatened with being kicked out of an ER for asking this question, wounds untreated, pain issue not resolved, all for asking the ER doctor if he had washed his hands recently.

Why did the WHO, the CDC, and so many other repositories of international science refuse 16-years of dedicated science about mask-wearing in the community and agree with the governments to force mask mandates onto the populations?  What changed in science; nothing!  What powered mask mandates; politics!  Where did masking healthy people as young as two-years-old originate; the warped and twisted minds of someone making a ton of money on mask manufacturing!  How did the masking of healthy people work out; it killed them through suicide, fear of hospitals, and through a fake sense of protection!  Want to know a truth; all of this was known, recognized, and understood through multiple studies, government training exercises, and real-world research as early as 2000.

Exclamation MarkI have to know why!  As a life-long learner, as a student of human interactions, an observer of groups of people and individuals, the why is the driving force in the five questions of study (who, what, when, where, how, and WHY).  I have been told to “Follow the money,” guess what, the money and the origin are similar.  I have been told, “It is political;” well, if that was true, where did the opposing party go?  I have been instructed, pointedly, by Federal Police Officers as they were arresting me because I physically cannot wear a mask.  My questions are ill-timed, inappropriate, and a public nuisance.  The political pandemic is all but concluded; my questions are not ill-timed anymore.  I want answers!  If this was a political exercise with a global bio-weapon, as postulated in March/April 2020.  In that case, I want the opposition party to start asking bureaucrats questions and drill down to answers!  It’s called scrutiny; exercise your elected responsibility!

As instructed in the book authored by Simon Sinek, “Start with Why!”  Why did governments steal power, authority, and liberty to demand mask adherence?  Why did the government push vaccination of a new and unstudied vaccine technology?  Why were effective drugs canceled to fit a political narrative while people were dying?  Why was a virus politicalized in the first place?  Look at the timing, and ask why the virus was released when it was released?  It is abundantly clear that the Wuhan Laboratory is deeply involved, which means the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is deeply engaged, and people died.  Why can’t the world’s people hold the CCP liable for the virus release and resulting harm?  Why can’t Fauci be held responsible for investing taxpayer dollars, against the order of the sitting US President, in the gain of function research?

When asking who got richer, ask why they appeared to force non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI’s) when these people stood to gain financially from those mandates of government?  Why did congressional representatives in the United States gain in measures above and beyond average market gains, all while people they were expected to represent in government died?Gravy Train 3

Before another question is asked, the media needs to answer why are they the voice box and cheer-leading squad of politicians?  In all representative governments, the media is supposed to be the third party, a neutral source, and a voice of the masses.  Why did the media forsake their job?  Why is the media always the lapdog of the liberal and progressive (regressive) parties?  Why did the press sell its heritage for a bowl of pottage?

Since the media refuses their job, and big technology is tied hand and foot to the press and politicians, like a warped three-legged race, why are the taxpayer dollars being used to enrich big-tech companies?  Why is a publicly-traded entity, big tech companies (LinkedIn, Facebook/Meta, Twitter, etc.), allowed into government offices?  Isn’t this the very epitome of insider trading?  Why is big tech even allowed to influence the government?  I need the why!

Why did the government take lists of the unvaccinated?  The political left has no morals, no compunction, and biggering the government is their god.  The political left is known for using any means necessary to get what they want.  Worse, the political left, and right, have proven untrustworthy, immoral, and unethical.  What happens next should be the second question answered after why!Detective

Finally, why did the religious leaders walk in lockstep with the government?  Sweden’s results are from following sound science, and they are better off than everyone else in the world.  Religious leaders have always claimed the moral high ground, even while “rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.”  Thus, we must know why the religious leaders did not protect their flocks and show authentic, inspired leadership?  Do you feel cheated by your religious and political leaders?  I have some concerns!

Please, don’t take my word for it.  Look it up.  My references are boldly stated to help you, not prove a point; research can only support a conclusion and proves NOTHING!  I have questions, and my research promotes more questions.  I would see you, dear reader, fully informed and able to ask your own questions.  In an ironic twist of inanity, the CDC reports the following, “glove use is NOT a substitute for cleaning your hands [emphasis inferred and mine].”  The research linked is a peer-reviewed document the CDC provides for doctors to promote more hand hygiene in medical situations.

?u=http3.bp.blogspot.com-CIl2VSm-mmgTZ0wMvH5UGIAAAAAAAAB20QA9_IiyVhYss1600showme_board3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1The science is in; this is a true statement, but changing the hearts and minds of people takes an inordinate amount of time that government interference only worsens!  If you reach different conclusions after conducting your own research, please use the comments to discuss, and include your research.  I am the first person to declare that I know nothing!

References

Miller, Ian.  Unmasked: The Global Failure of COVID Mask Mandates.  Post Hill Press.  Kindle Edition.

Pittet, D., Simon, A., Hugonnet, S., Pessoa-Silva, C. L., Sauvan, V., & Perneger, T. V. (2004). Hand hygiene among physicians: performance, beliefs, and perceptions.  Annals of internal medicine, 141(1), 1-8.

Vincent M, Edwards P. Disposable surgical face masks for preventing surgical wound infection in clean surgery.  Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 4.  Art.  No.: CD002929.  DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD00292

© Copyright 2022 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.  Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

Plastic Words – The Tool of Tyrants and Authoritarians

Detective 4Consider with me the actions of Fauci and the liquid definitions of “Gain of Function” research.  Before Fauci started getting hammered by Senator Rand Paul for funding “Gain of Function” research, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) changed the definition to protect Fauci from the crime of “lying to Congress.”  Consider the other lies, language tricks, and tyrannical actions of Fauci throughout COVID from Feb 2020 to the present (Feb 2022).  Fauci regularly claims he is “consistent” in his approach, even when claiming he lies with noble purposes.

Quoting Uwe Poerksen (1995, p. 6), “… words, they sometimes appear to be a skeleton that displays the structure of the world more clearly than a full ideological presentation. … Words are channels that run ahead of history… they should be questioned constantly.”  Consider this for a moment.  Think of the skeleton, the bone structures that form the fundamental structure of a body.  Words akin to the skeleton or frame allow the ability to communicate an idea, creating the substance of that idea for others to consider.

However, words by themselves, like a rib, an ulna, a hip bone, are merely a structure in a greater body.  Words need the sentence structure to be appropriately organized to communicate with another person adequately.  Why should words be questioned constantly?  Because the use of a word is intentional by those speaking, and if the person speaking is attempting to control others through subterfuge, they will intentionally employ language that sounds nice while hiding their agenda.

Angry Wet ChickenCanada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is employing these exact tactics right now in Ottawa, where the #FreedomConvoy is concerned.  Listen carefully to the words and tone used.  Someone in the media should have asked about the prime minister’s intent when calling peaceful protestors racists, fascists, and other derogatory terms.  Merely uttering those words should have been a warning to every Canadian citizen and media representative that the prime minister has left the reservation and needs to be questioned more thoroughly about his intentions, reasons, and legal footing for taking action and uttering the words he has used.

One example, the prime minister claimed he wanted to build trust with the Canadian People.  Still, all evidence (polls, opinions, and observations) declares the prime minister is vainly struggling to hold onto personal power, not build trust.  How is the prime minister using the terms trust, terrorist, and other words to frame his ideas to better the lives of Canadians?  Since the media is not going to call out the prime minister’s authoritarian actions and words.  In that case, those protesting in Ottawa and at key crossings across the Canadian US borders are justified in peacefully assembling and demanding the government listen and act accordingly.

Recently, in the United States, people who consider themselves to be leaders and influencers gathered and discussed the plight of democracy.  While the event was couched in friendly-sounding narratives, the actual intent of this gathering was to steal rights, liberties, and freedoms, further moving the United States of America under the heel of socialism (communism) for personal power.

?u=http3.bp.blogspot.com-CIl2VSm-mmgTZ0wMvH5UGIAAAAAAAAB20QA9_IiyVhYss1600showme_board3.jpg&f=1&nofb=1Since the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), democracy has experienced the same fate as the term sexuality, as discussed by Uwe Poerksen (1995, p. 12).  Democracy has “made its appearance as a fixed element, which the reader cannot comprehend.”  Political Science degree holders, media representatives, and tyrannical influencers have twisted the term democracy, plasticizing the term and then stretching it until confusion reigns, chaos flourishes, and the result is theft of thought.  Unfortunately, democracy is but one of a list of thousands of terms regularly plasticized for political gain and the expansion of tyranny.

During President Trump’s run for the presidency and his tenure in the Oval Office, a mental disease was passed around called “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” plasticizing a word while trying to describe the phenomenon of the term “disease” for political gain.  Yet, what did we witness then, which continues today, people choosing to blame President Trump for everything wrong when personal responsibility and confusion of vernacular are central to the problems experienced.Mediocrity Joke

Governor Jerry Brown, California, 1975-1983, in praising Uwe Poerksen’s book, made the following statement.

In the spirit of George Orwell, Poerksen lays bare the tyranny of the small number of words such as ‘development,’ ‘information,’ and ‘strategic plans,’ that now corrupt official thinking and even invade our very consciousness.  His treatment of ‘plastics words’ is careful and chilling.  Study it and wake up.”

George Orwell’s book “1984” sits beside my copy of Uwe Poerksen’s book, “Plastic Words: The Tyranny of a Modular Language,” for a reason.  These books speak to the problem every citizen faces in representative governments, and modular language is the tool used to steal our governments, rights, liberties, and freedoms.  If we do not, in Gov. Brown’s words, “Wake Up!” [emphasis mine] we will lose our governments, our voices, and our children will have to fight for that which we gave away.

Exclamation MarkConsider the following from Uwe Poerksen (1995, p 88-89), where the author speaks of experts acting as functionaries who shape reality through their words.  Compare this to Biden, Trudeau, or any number of other politicians, media talking heads, and so-called “influencers,” and a cold shiver should creep up your spine.

The Expert

    • Silences anyone and everyone who disagrees with them
    • Reforms the everyday world using concepts and vocabulary of the scientific world inappropriately
    • Employs language with a wide radius of application
    • Displaces words from a common understanding
    • Speech is poor in content
    • Speech reduces diversity to a common denominator
    • Disembodies history from the context
    • Transforms words into a social laboratory for experimentation
    • Dispensing truth and moral right and wrong for progressive, backward, regressive, etc.
    • Consistently appearing on the side of enlightenment
    • Claims expertness and employs other experts to pompously fill the social function they supply as more important than everyone and every other problem and issue
    • Calling upon other experts to raise individual prestige
    • Awakens limitless needs
    • Institutionalizes themselves interjecting their expertise into every problem
    • Creates compound words as flexible instruments to manufacture new reality models
    • Castigates history as useless, impertinent, and useless in the present tense
    • Claims international appeal and anyone denying is considered out-of-date and out-of-touch
    • Their positions are always new
    • Their language lacks individual voice

Knowledge Check!The list above is not directly quoted but summated.  I am in no way an expert, and Uwe Poerksen wields language like a surgeon wields a scalpel, with precision and exactness.  I admit that my biases and understanding could vary wildly from the author in summating the list above.  I have included this list precisely because it forms a framework for judging for yourselves the media, politicians, lawyers, and others who consider themselves an expert.  My intent is to help you become more aware, awake, and knowledgeable of what is happening, empowering you to judge for yourself who is influencing you through words.

What you do with this information is your choice.  If I have awakened you to the danger around you and me through these abusers, tyrants, and authoritarians, I have done my job.  We, the owners of representative governments, must awake to how and where we are being abused to begin the laborious process of ending the abuse and taking back the reigns of the government.  The first step in recovering from an addiction is to admit we have a problem.  Waking up to the reality there is a problem is a job every citizen of a representative government must make for themselves.Theres more

What will you do now?  I refuse to be a victim of abuse!

© Copyright 2022 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.  Quoted materials remain the property of the original author.

The Role of a Call Center Trainer: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

Bobblehead DollI want to express my deepest gratitude to Call Centre Helper Magazine for the opportunity to advertise for my dissertation research.  I once asked a call center leader what a trainer does; their answer still makes me chuckle.

A trainer trains!

Kind of obvious, right.  Now, what does a trainer train?  How does a trainer train?  How does a business leader know the trainer has been successful in training?  What is the purpose of training?  What does training do for those trained?  These questions and the business leaders’ comment have inspired my professional and academic footsteps for several years now.Call Center 2

In early July 2021, I finally received permission to begin human testing for my dissertation.  I have posted several advertisements on social media for call center workers, trainers, and senior leaders to entice 17 people willing to answer some questions about training in call centers, a call center trainer, and what precisely a call center trainer does.  The following is a brief description of the aims and intents of my research to increase interest and hopefully glean the needed participants to finish my study.

Consider for a moment a teacher who has influenced you professionally or personally, and why did they make such an impact?  Could a different person have made the same impact?  Why?

The above questions are the crux of my research; to date, the role of the instructor has not been considered a variable in corporate training.  As an adult educator, I find this gap very alarming.  In academia, the teacher’s role has been extensively studied, and opinions abound regarding the role of the teacher.  Yet, in a professional setting, no researcher has addressed this gap to date.  With the push to move all training to computer-based solutions in autonomous environments, if the trainer does not teach corporate knowledge and behaviors, who does?

Call Center BeansIn researching the history of professional training, the model employed has not changed since a master taught journeyman who led novice instruction.  Yet, with technology, global populations, cultures, language, and globe-spanning organizations, the role of the trainer seems to continue to take a back seat.  Yet, if a corporate trainer profoundly influenced you professionally, would you not want that experience for another person?

Due to the restrictions on human testing in research, I cannot change the dry legalese of the advertisements.  I know they are long, tedious, and challenging to get through.  However, if you are interested, please get in touch with me directly using:

Msalisbury1@my.gcu.edu

Please note, to participate, you will need the following:

      • Work in an English Speaking Call Center with a home base in the United States.
      • Have a LinkedIn account (This is for verification of professional qualifications only).
      • Speak English like a native.
      • Be willing to answer demographic questions, including time in the current role, education, and so forth.
      • Be willing to elaborate upon your answers. I will ask you some questions about your experiences; please provide details, depth, and descriptions as your answer.

Knowledge Check!Important to note, your name and business will never be mentioned in my dissertation!  I am not collecting any personal data beyond education and years of experience.  Any direct quotes employed will carry no connecting data, and no one will see your details.

Thank you for considering joining me in my dissertation research.  I look forward to publishing this research and discussing the findings with you in later articles.

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

 

When Fiction is Reality – The World Weeps!

Exclamation MarkI find a piece of fiction masquerading as science from today’s email, and I cannot help but ask myself, when did fiction become a reality?  How did Orwell’s 1984 escape the pages and become a reality?  Why did Animal House exit the big screen and become a way of life?  Mark Twain is one of the most often quoted authors, and I particularly like his comments on statistics which is pertinent to today’s discussion on fiction.

“There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

Consider something with me; even if you initially disagree, please humor me.  Statistics prove nothing; the best a statistical analysis can ever do is represent a bias towards a specific course of action.  That is it!  Mark Twain’s quote describes the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. Mark Twain’s point is used to doubt statistics to prove an opponent’s point.  Inherent in every statistical analysis are the researcher’s biases, the desire of the researcher to attempt to verify something via numbers that are generally unable to be proved otherwise.Anton Ego

Except research proves nothing; even peer-reviewed research, the gold standard in research, can only point a person towards a potential solution and encourage a person towards a course of action.  The numbers prove nothing, ever!  Many people have become convinced that statistical data is comparable to “Holy Writ,” which is erroneous and dangerous.  Let me prove it to you, please.

Project Implicit

Project implicit was designed by Harvard University, is hosted on Harvard’s servers, and is all about individual bias.  Implicit bias in statistics is described as bias that occurs automatically and unintentionally, that nevertheless affects judgments, decisions, and behaviors.  Bog-standard bias is considered attitudes, behaviors, and actions that are prejudiced in favor or opposition to a person, group, or thing.  But, here is the clincher, bias is judged by others as a projection of themselves when they encounter other people, places, or things.

Broccoli PNGFor example, President Bush I, did not like broccoli.  A prejudice, possibly from childhood, he does not like this vegetable and handled the situation poorly at a state dinner in Japan.  Not liking broccoli is a bog-standard bias.  Other people, especially those enjoying broccoli, will view this event and shake their heads, possibly even ridiculing the president for his disinterest in broccoli.  Others who agree that broccoli is nasty will not have a problem with the presidential bias against broccoli as they exercise the same intolerance.  Thus, a bias is a behavior, an attitude, and supporting actions against something, someone, or someplace, even if that bias is understood or not.

Implicit bias takes normal bias one step further, according to psychiatrists and psychologists.  The extra step includes the inability to explain why a person does not like broccoli.  If there is no hidden reasoning from childhood, traumatic experiences, or irrational fears, then bog-standard bias is considered implicit bias, as judged by the person observing the behaviors.  Are the differences apparent; the reason I ask this is because of the problem in naming biases, the individual doing the observing and judging.Implicit Bias Test

In a branch of science called “Chaos Theory,” there is a hypothesis “that people affect their environments to their own desires.”  The premise was accidentally discovered when humans observed particles under close study and observed under remote means, and the particles acted differently.  The human influence upon particles was a giant leap forward in science, and nowhere is the power of researchers more fully understood than in human sciences (psychology, psychiatry, etc.).  The human brain is wired to connect socially, which is part of the problem when humans are studied under observation.  The innate desire to connect means that people will choose differently when under direct observation, when under remote observation, and when under no observation.

Hence bias is a judgment of another as witnessed through a lens of another person’s understanding, opinions, biases, and experiences.  Researcher bias is a fact inescapable and remains a topic of discussion in every research paper as a contributing factor to the results.  Why; because the researcher’s influenced the results, influenced the data, and influenced the process to achieve their own desires for an outcome. QED: Thoughts become things.Thoughts Become Things | the quotes

Returning to Project Implicit, ask yourself, why would you allow someone else to judge you?  Do you know them?  Do they know you?  Do you fully appreciate that the other person and yourself will influence the results?

Project implicit claims to measure, using mathematical formula the bias of another person, using time and word lists.  Using this formula (v1-v2=BIAS), Project Implicit proclaims they can help you recognize implicit bias on a range of topics from racism to gender roles and from veggies to pets, all because the mathematics claim they are conducting science.  Except, the implicit association is rigged to produce the desired results, as discussed above; hence, where is the veracity?The problems with implicit bias training | The Spectator | Truth Conquers All

GIGO

Garbage in equals garbage out (GIGO) is an axiom that initially began in computer programming and signified that when you dump a bunch of garbage into a system, the results are garbage.  The same is true for every single human endeavor; when you begin with garbage, the best you get for a result is more garbage.  Returning to implicit associations as an indicator of implicit biases, ask yourself, who selected the terms associated with the topic under study, the researcher or the researchee?

Of course, the researcher selected the terms, chose the topic, and tested how fast you can associate a word with the topic under study.  Then comparing the two results declares you have a bias.  Except, do you have a bias; I do not think so!  But, that’s my bias, for I choose to believe that you know how to choose and act in social environments to your potential and desired outcomes.[الإنحياز الضمني] مكتبات التصنيف الجاهزة في العقل البشري | محمد بن نخيلان الشمري

An Example

I was ordered to take an implicit association test to measure my emotional intelligence in a previous position.  The test used word associations on the topic of gender roles and leadership.  Believe it or not, I failed that association test; I do not place genders into any roles as traditional or limited to one gender or the other.  The best leaders are good followers; leaders are not born, they are made; gender, like race, never plays a role in the leadership potential of the person in charge.  Yet, when I failed the association test, my organization was informed I was obstinate, difficult, and opinionated; not that I deny these accusations, I simply refuse to fit into a pre-determined box.  Plus, I would see more people escape the box that has been built for them to “fit” into!https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8368/8537356422_23bf051215_b.jpg

Later that same week, I snuck into the association exam a second and third time, mainly because the researchers kept sending active links that did not discriminate against logins that had previously taken their test.  Yes, I intentionally poked holes into these researcher’s pet project, and I will explain in a minute why.  On my second attempt, I chose what the results considered a “traditional male” with a bias against women.  In the third attempt, I decided to be a woman with a grudge against men and their traditional roles.  I wanted to show how irrelevant these word association tests are and how the results should never be taken seriously.

My plan backfired; my employer was not happy.  The researchers had to scrap their entire data set and go back to the drawing board to fix the research plan, and then after regaining approval, collect human testing data a second time.  Lots of prestige was lost for my employer.  I did not care then; I care less even now; even though I eventually left that position with people angry with me, I do not regret my actions.  Thankfully, I was not the only person offended by the word associations and the results which “snuck back” to play!Mediocrity Joke

Why is this important?

The answer to why these topics are important is found in the principles outlined:

  1. Statistics prove nothing!
  2. Statistics can only support a course of action!
  3. Research can only support a decision!
  4. Research cannot prove anything!
  5. Faux science abounds, and until researchers and academia acknowledge this problem, it will only grow.
  6. Never believe what you read, see, or hear!
  7. Faux science is being used to classify, separate, denigrate, and deride!
  8. Faux science is the excuse for stealing your liberty, freedoms, and legal rights under the US Constitution!
  9. Faux science crops up in courtrooms which is a cause for bad case law, which develops into detestable legislation!
  10. Faux science looks, sounds, and appears legitimate until you dig deeper. If you do not dig, you will be misled!

Bobblehead DollI cannot stress enough the need for every person to stop accepting the box others claim you must live in to “get along and get ahead.”  You are an individual with inalienable rights, a brilliant mind, and unlimited potential.  You are needed on the front lines of the battlefields of today.  You must play an active role, or you will not be able to leave the American Heritage and this great Republic to your children and community.

But, like the “Reading Rainbow” used to proclaim, “Don’t take my word for it!”  Meaning explore, doubt, ask questions, and keep asking questions until you are satisfied the answers are truthful, without dissemination.  Liars will tell you a thousand truths to get you to believe a single lie.  But, do not take my word for it; prove it to yourself; then teach it to another person so that you can learn more perfectly.Reading Rainbow

© 2021 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain; this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.

Calling for Call Center Employees and Junior Call Center Trainers

Date: 19 July 2021

Call Center Agent - MaleI am a doctoral candidate under the direction of Professor Dr. Susan Miedzianowski in the College of Doctoral Studies at Grand Canyon University. My name is Michael D. “Dave” Salisbury. I am conducting a research study to explore the trainer’s specific influence on employees’ development in an English-speaking call center based on a clear understanding of the trainer’s role.

I am recruiting individuals that meet these criteria:

      • Do you speak English?
      • Do you live and work in the United States?
      • Are you employed in an English-speaking call center?
      • Do you have an updated LinkedIn.com profile (for verification purposes only)?
      • Are you willing to answer demographic questions about your level of education, years of experience in the call center industry, years in your current call center, and your current job title?
      • Are you an adult over the age of 18?
      • Are you willing to be audio-recorded using ZOOM online software?

You cannot be in this study if you answer “No,” to any of these questions; you cannot participate in the interviews. I will verify your eligibility before setting up the interview.

The activities for this research project will include:

If you are eligible to be in this study, you will be asked to:

      • What:
        • You agree to answer the demographic questions honestly.
        • Be interviewed, via Zoom, for approximately 60 minutes, audio-recorded, or if comfortable, video recorded, your choice.
        • Answer a series of questions regarding how a call center trainer has influenced you. As well as what you think a call center trainer does.
        • Review a generic job description and comment upon what is contained and whether you would add or subtract anything.
      • When: On a convenient date and time discussed via email.
      • Where:com online meeting.
      • How: Using your home computer or Internet-capable device, connecting with Zoom.com.

Your participation in this study is voluntary.

An alias will protect all data in this study during the recording of the actual interview and in the documents using an alpha-numeric code to hide your email address and hide any potential method to track your responses back to you.  All information reported in the dissertation will be in a collated format so individual data cannot be tracked to any single participant.

If you are interested in participating in this study, please contact:
M. Dave Salisbury
(435-219-5414)
msalisbury1@my.gcu.edu

Thank you!