edger

Irony, no? AD?

Ha! Yes, far more interesting and creative when a bottle of scotch is involved. Keeps the epiphanies flowing

Happy birthday Aaron! Hope this coming year treats you kindly.

This Ain't Hollywood, Hamilton

Apparently instead I will be at my mom's trashy trailer park taking in the Travelling Beerbellies instead. Oh family. Good times

Plus I believe Trampled by Turtles are at the Ballroom in Buffalo saturday night as well. I wanna go!!!

Tough date for me but REALLY happy to hear this is happening

Sadies, Los Lobos and Neil Young makes for one sweet bill!

Really? Shit yeah, that's great news.

Happy birthday to you!

Thanks again guys!

That just blew the garden of my miiiind

I'm not a "scientist"

Shucks. Thanks so much guys! It has been a challenging road juggling motherhood and health concerns and such but it has been an interesting ride that's for sure. I can honestly say that this board has been with me the whole way through. A welcome source of distraction, humour, company and grounding when it was very much needed. Happy to have this lifted off my shoulders so I can gear up for the next stage. Must say I can't WAIT to let 'er all hang at All Good. Hot damn... TITLE: The socio-spatial construction and negotiation of knowledge, power and influence in the governance of environmental health risks from toxic chemicals in Canada ABSTRACT: Environmental health effects from chemicals are an example of risks associated with modern, industrialized, technologically advanced, capitalist society. In Canada approximately 23,000 substances have been in commercial use despite never being assessed for their risks to human health and the environment. The assessment, management and regulation of environmental health risks from “existing†chemical substances can be viewed as an emerging and contested domain of governance whereby an increasing number of diverse stakeholders are seeking to shape its constituent actors, rule systems, knowledge inputs, and orientation. Using a multi-method case-study of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, this thesis examines how governance and decision-making rationales, knowledge inputs, influence, and authority become constructed, negotiated and (de)legitimized in practice, and the role and significance of “space†in these processes. Sources of data include scientific, policy and legal documents, participant observation and key informant interviews. Findings reveal that stakeholders divergently interpret evidence and exploit scientific uncertainties using various tactics that (de)legitimize particular claims and policy prescriptions to favour their interests. This has significant implications for how “precaution†and “weight-of-evidence†are operationalized. The concepts of “scale-frames†and “boundary-work†reveal how stakeholders construct and spatially bound political and epistemic legitimacy and authority through contested definitions and rationales of accessibility, inclusion and exclusion. To gain the influence and legitimacy that is needed for effectively shaping environmental health policy stakeholders must (re)define the jurisdictional and epistemic spaces in which knowledge, evidence and rationales are created and institutionalized. Bringing contested modes of subject-making around expertise and technical capacity to the fore assists in explaining why particular forms of knowledge production and interpretations of evidence are adopted while others are downplayed. This in turn perpetuates particular kinds of risk assessment and management tools and approaches that benefit some and marginalize others. Scientific and political deliberations are situated within existing relationships of power and production between modern administative states, big industry and mega-science. Thus prevailing "governmentalities", logics and tools of chemical management are driven by, while mutually reinforcing broader neo-liberal political-economic ideals and interests.

Hot diggity! Missed these guys the last time round

Yeah isn't that always the way. Still you would think that some sort of precedent would be set or extra diligence taken even if the final verdict hasn't rolled in given the amount of times it has now happened. I would like to think the judicial process would be less tolerant given the amount of "opportunities for learning" that have now presented themselves. Edit to add: I mean I am fully aware of and obviously willing to take a calculated risk every time I go to a large concert even. Shit can and does happen. But this just seems so grossly inexcusable (barring maybe the event in Alberta where extreme weather was a factor) and even then... This shouldn't have to be factored into people's risk/benefit analyses...

Apparently Schwa knows a thing or two about keeping stages erect In all seriousness though I just don't understand why what seems to be basic safety protocols are not the norm. Shouldn't the potential penalties (if death and injury of your musicians and patrons is not enough) be so exhorbitant that no one in their right mind would ever put their neck on the line? Has anyone been held financially liable for any of the many recent stage collapses?

I absolutely loved watching him cross. For the feat in and of itself, but honestly i had never seen footage of the falls like that. Seeing him cross, especially at particular angles just gave me a whole new appreciation for the scale and beauty of the falls and its sheer voluminous power. Very cool! The amount of water running over the wire in the "wet zone" was just ridiculous.

I was away and just heard about this this morning. How shocking and with the number of related incidents in recent time its downright ridiculous that this keeps happening.

Ah yes, a day to reflect back on your origins Happy clownin' and enjoy the bluegrass

In! Toronto. Floor.

Indian tapas eh.... yum!

Happy birthday to you!

This looks fun

Quit hijacking the Seldane thread Brad!