Podcasts about Taconic

Says deputies punished for writing too few tickets The union representing Putnam County Sheriff's Office deputies said it has filed a complaint with the state labor board alleging that its members are penalized for failing to meet quotas for writing tickets. The Sheriff's Office PBA announced on May 10 that an action has been filed with the state Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) against Sheriff Kevin McConville, Putnam County and County Executive Kevin Byrne. Neither the union nor the sheriff or county executive's offices responded to emails about the allegation, but a Facebook post by the PBA said Capt. James Schepperly, who heads the Sheriff's Office's patrol division, has used quotas "as a gauge of a deputy's performance," in violation of department policy and state law. The Sheriff's Office only publicizes its use-of-force policy. But state labor law bars police agencies from penalizing officers - including "reassignment, a scheduling change, an adverse evaluation, a constructive dismissal, the denial of a promotion or the denial of overtime" - for failing to meet quotas for writing tickets or arresting or stopping people. Putnam deputies who did not write enough tickets "had their schedules changed and were subjected to a change of duty assignment or location as punishment," according to the PBA. "It's our expectation that once our case is heard by PERB they will side with the PBA and these unlawful, retaliatory actions, that create an increase in tax dollars, will stop." According to data provided by the state Department of Motor Vehicles, Putnam deputies wrote 5,422 tickets in 2024, 20 percent fewer than 2023. Most drivers were cited in Southeast, followed by Philipstown and Putnam Valley. The most common infraction was an expired or missing state safety inspection, followed by driving without a license, lack of registration, speeding and disobeying a traffic device. According to Jackie Fielding, a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice in New York City who co-authored a 2022 report on ticket quotas, they "can incentivize officers to prioritize enforcement activities that can be completed quickly and easily," rather than "investigating more complex or violent crimes that significantly impact public safety." "In the more extreme case, officers can resort to malfeasance to meet their quotas: fabricating a reason for a stop or arrest, assigning tickets to fictitious drivers or even recording tickets for dead people," she said. One case occurred in February 2023, when the Westchester County district attorney charged a state trooper, Edward Longo, with writing at least 32 tickets over 10 years on the Sprain and Taconic parkways for drivers he never stopped, including someone who had died before the ticket was issued. Longo was charged with 32 felony counts. The trooper who filed the paperwork charging Longo said his division "monitors its officers for performance-related goals in the issuance of traffic tickets," according to The Journal News, and may counsel those "who do not meet expectations or whose productivity falls below their peers."

Send us a text We are joined by one of the owners of Taconic Distilleries, Paul Coughlin. Paul has a very interesting background from not only the distillery, but his shooting journey and how life lead him to where he is today. This was a great interview and we were very privileged to have him join us on this episode and humbled to have him a part of our program! Tune in to hear for yourself!   After we wrap up our conversation with Paul, we are joined by Kevin McNamara, supervisor of assembly and service for sporting clays at Kolar Arms, to introduce Ryan Smith, Sales support for dealers and customers. Ryan came to Kolar from Northbrook, and is hitting the ground running. Listen closely because this not only an introduction, but there is a surprise for the upcoming U.S. Open!DEAD PAIR / KOLAR DRAWING - https://e.givesmart.com/events/HpS/i/_All/u1g0/?search=- Kolar Arms - https://www.kolararms.com - Fiocchi USA - https://fiocchiusa.com - Atlas Traps - https://www.atlastraps.com - Rhino Chokes - https://rhinochokes.com - Ranger Shooting Eyewear - https://www.reranger.com Ranger 10% Discount = DEADPAIR - Taconic Distillery - https://www.spirits.taconicdistillery.com/  Discount code -DEADPAIR10 - Long Range - https://www.longrangellc.com - Score Chaser - https://scorechaser.com/ - National Sporting Clays Association - https://nssa-nsca.org/ - Clay Range Design Works - https://traptowers.comSupport the showThe Dead Pair Podcast - https://thedeadpair.com FACEBOOK- https://www.facebook.com/Thedeadpair. INSTAGRAM- https://www.instagram.com/thedeadpairpodcast/YOUTUBE- https://youtube.com/channel/UCO1ePh4I-2D0EABDbKxEgoQ

Jump ahead using timestamps (12:24) - Madeline Kingsbury Update (13:43) - Diane Schuler In 2009, Diane Schuler was returning to her New York home after a camping trip with five young children in the minivan she was driving - her two children and three nieces. She took the kids to McDonalds for breakfast and witnesses said the family seemed fine and nothing was amiss. Diane made another stop at a gas station looking for a specific over-the-counter pain medication, but the store didn't carry it. After this, Diane pulled over multiple times and was seen hunched over appearing sick outside of the vehicle. One of her nieces called their father and said, ‘There's something wrong with Aunt Diane.'  Family members told Diane to stay where she was, but Diane continued the drive regardless. She drove the wrong way onto the busy Taconic State Parkway and struck another vehicle head-on at a high rate of speed.  The crash became known as the worst fatal motor vehicle accident in Westchester County. 8 people were killed, including Diane, her daughter and all of her nieces. An empty bottle of vodka was found in the wreckage of the vehicle and Diane's BAC was reported to be 0.19%. She also had high levels of THC in her system and was suspected to have smoked marijuana as recently as 15 minutes prior to the collision. Diane's husband remains adamant that driving under the influence is not what caused the accident and believes Diane suffered a medical emergency. Join us on Patreon for exclusive, ad-free content. Read our blog for this case This episode is sponsored by: It's holiday season!  Check out Uncommon Goods and Skylight Frames for perfect gifts for loved ones. Uncommon Goods - To get 15% off your next gift, go to UncommonGoods.com/tcs. Don't miss out on this limited time offer! Uncommon Goods. We're all out of the ordinary. Skylight Frame - Get twenty dollars off your purchase of a Skylight Frame when you go to SkylightFrame.com/SOCIETY

In this episode of Whiskey Rocks, Joel and Chris dive into the rhythm of Taconic Distillery, a hidden gem nestled in the Hudson Valley. Known for its award-winning bourbons and ryes, Taconic has been hitting all the right notes in the whiskey world. Join Joel and Chris and special guest Alex McCabe (@bourbonboot) as they chat with Sean O'Donnell, uncovering the story behind Taconic's rise, its dedication to craft, and its deep connection to the scenic Hudson Valley. Whether you're a whiskey connoisseur or just tuning in for the groove, this episode will leave you inspired to sip and savor the spirit of Taconic.@taconic_distillery on IG

Richey Reneberg is the Global Co-Head of Investor Relations and Marketing at Taconic Capital, a global event driven alternatives manager founded in 1999 by former Goldman Sachs Partners, Frank Brosens and Ken Brody.      Richey's career path into the industry is atypical so I was excited to share his story.     Prior to joining Taconic in 2000, Richey spent thirteen years competing on the professional tennis circuit reaching a career high of #20 in the world in singles and #1 in the world in doubles. He was a five-time member of the US Davis Cup Team and represented the United States in the 1996 Olympics.   Richey shares how personal connections created an opportunity into the investment industry and how skills learned on the court transferred to the business world.   We then uncover some best practices through the lens of an IR person. Whether you are engaging with a GP on ODD or monitoring a manager in your portfolio, Richey provides some insights from his 20 years in the business on how to create strong GP and LP relationships. Take Capital Allocator's Audience Engagement Survey Learn More Follow Capital Allocators at @tseides or LinkedIn Subscribe to the mailing list Access transcript with Premium Membership

Projects visitation starting in 2033 After 14 months of work, the Visitation Data Committee, an independent group representing Philipstown, Beacon and Fishkill, has approved a report for the Hudson Highlands Fjord Trail. The committee, created by HHFT to review its traffic and pedestrian data and projections for the proposed 7.5-mile linear park between Long Dock Park in Beacon and Dockside Park in Cold Spring, met for the first time in August 2023 at Little Stony Point. The 11-member committee selected and worked with BFJ Planning to examine trends in visitation throughout Hudson Highlands State Park Preserve - which includes Breakneck Ridge, Mount Beacon, Denning's Point, Little Stony Point and Bull Hill - to project how the Fjord Trail might affect visitation. It includes representatives from Cold Spring, Nelsonville, Philipstown, Beacon and the Town of Fishkill. The Fjord Trail is projected to be completed by 2031, but the report's projections begin in 2033. The committee considered the first two years the trail will be open as "surge years," with higher visitation than usual because of the park's novelty. The report also differentiates between "visitors" and "visitation." The former refers to individuals who will use the trail at any time over a year, including locals. The latter refers to the number of visits. As an example, a resident of Cold Spring who walks on the Fjord Trail five days a week, 52 weeks a year, would count as one visitor but 260 visits. Based on data collected last year, the committee estimated that 55,550 people made 440,400 visits to the trails and parks that make up the Fjord Trail corridor. Notably, visitation at Breakneck Ridge has fallen drastically over the past three years, with nearly 37,000 fewer hikers in 2023 than 2019. The report projects that the Fjord Trail will add 268,700 visits a year by people who would not normally come to the connected parks and trails. That's an increase over the HHFT's projections of 204,900 visits a year. The visits would not all occur at any one point along the trail, such as Cold Spring, it noted. With the Fjord Trail, the committee calculated the visitation in 2033 in the corridor at 637,000 (including residents, cruise ship passengers and hikers at Breakneck Ridge and connecting trails and parks). Data Committee Members Henry Feldman, James Labate (Cold Spring); Phil Cotennec, Jeff Robins (Philipstown); Mayor Chris Winward (Nelsonville); Council Member Amber Grant, Sarah Mencher, Zack Smith (Beacon); Council Member Greg Totino, Planning Board Chair Jon Kanter, Supervisor Ozzy Albra (Fishkill) To project future visitation, the committee looked at numbers over the past several years from similar linear parks, including Walkway Over the Hudson in Poughkeepsie and Pennsylvania's Susquehanna River Walk and Buffalo Valley Trail. It also looked at the increase of visitors recently to the Hudson Highlands, Palisades and Taconic state parks and weighed the Hudson Highlands State Park's easy access via mass transit. This led to the projection that, over the next 10 years, visitation at Hudson Highlands State Park will increase by an average of 3.2 percent per year, regardless of Fjord Trail development. The report also projects that 225,900 of the 637,000 visits will be hikers using the Fjord Trail to reach nearby destinations such as Breakneck or Bull Hill and not spending a significant amount of time on the Fjord Trail itself - a situation called "captured visitation." There's also "shifted visitation," which is visits to the Fjord Trail instead of adjacent parks and trails. The report estimates this will be 31,900 annually, a relatively low number because it expects the Fjord Trail will be a different experience than hiking Breakneck Ridge or Mount Beacon. Reviewing past visitation numbers, the committee determined that the busiest month of the year for the Fjord Trail corridor is October, followed by September and May. The busiest time for hikers to arrive is b...

Whisk(e)y Wednesday Taconic w/ Sean O'Donnell Sept 11th 2024 September 11th WW Taconic Distillery w/ Brand Sales Manager Sean O'Donnell. Sean O'Donnell was born and raised in Long Island, New York. As a well-respected industry veteran with a passion for spirits and brand building, Sean has worked for Brown Forman, The Absolut Spirits Company and The Phillips Distilling Company in various sales and marketing roles. TASTING LINE-UP Taconic Dutchess Private Reserve Bourbon Taconic Double Barrel Maple Bourbon Taconic Founders Rye Taconic NY Single Malt Taconic Barrel Strength Bourbon Taconic Barrel Strength Rye Taconic Bourbon Cream Bonus: Taconic Mizunara Finished Bourbon (pre-sell)

Taconic is a distillery located in the Hudson Valley Region of New York State. Falling right in the tail end of the barometric pattern, this distillery always brings out some delicious and delicate but robust flavors that have you putting Kentucky to the side and sipping on something local.  Check out the video to hear the full review!  00:00 Introduction01:37 Whiskey Information02:48 Label and Branding04:40 Nose06:58 Initial Taste09:53 Ending Notes 12:18 Final Rating12:44 Would You Buy and Final ThoughtsThank you to our Sponsor Addys Wine and Liquor. If you are in the market for a new bottle of whiskey or some wine, this is the place to go. Located on Transit Road in Williamsville, they have all the right staff to guide you in the perfect direction. Download their App to be notified when they have events, allocated products, and sales, and they can also ship to you! Download the app here! Android link: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cta.AddyFineWineApple Link: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/addys-lexis-wine-spirits/id1375492533**Ethics Statement**All whiskey review is 100% honest and we have no obligation to review or give a higher rating just because it is sent to us. Any one that wants to send us a bottle can contact us through our Instagram, but know that it will be our honest rating. We want to provide all of you with a genuine analysis that you can take as our stamp of approval, and we wouldn't be able to have that if we inflated just because we received it for free. #whiskeyreview #taconicwhiskey #newyorkwhisky #whiskeytube #bourbontube #whiskeytasting #whiskey #bourbon #whiskeyreview #bourbonreview #irishwhiskeyreview #scotch #whiskyAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Andy Cocker picked up golf 13 years ago. Now he's traveling the world to rate courses for Top 100 Golf Courses. He recently spent some time in New England. We discuss a number of the courses he's played, how he gets onto the private courses, what he likes and dislikes, and we dig into Hooper, Taconic, Boston Golf, Old Sandwich, and the Cape Cod golf scene, which is where he spends most of his time while visiting the area.LINKS:Watch on YouTubeSubscribe to the Newsletter Baystate Golf on IGSeanMeliaGolf on TwitterBaystateGolf.com

Philipstown landscaper, speeding deputy collided Putnam County is poised to approve a $775,000 settlement with a Philipstown landscaper severely injured in a May 2021 crash when a sheriff's deputy crossed the double yellow lines on Route 301 while speeding to a non-emergency call. The Legislature's Audit Committee on Monday (April 29) approved a resolution authorizing the settlement with Marc Manzoeillo, who owns Marc's Landscaping and Outdoor Living. He suffered a broken shoulder, head and back lacerations, a concussion and left hip and right ankle injuries when he was ejected from his Ford dump truck after the collision with a Dodge Charger driven by Sgt. William Quick. The full Legislature is expected to vote on Tuesday (May 7) to settle the lawsuit Manzoeillo filed in January 2022 against the county, the Sheriff's Office and Quick, who was airlifted to Westchester Medical Center after being pinned for an hour by the Charger's dashboard and steering wheel. Putnam would pay a $250,000 deductible and insurance would cover the rest. According to court records, Quick, who later retired on disability, decided to respond after seeing that three deputies were dispatched to investigate a report of a suspicious person on a property at 657 Route 301. After racing down the Taconic to Route 301, Quick reached 75 mph as he sped west on a narrow, two-lane stretch near Canopus Lake, where the speed limit is 40 miles per hour. The sergeant shifted to the eastbound lane to pass a vehicle just as Manzoeillo approached from the opposite direction. Manzoeillo hit the brakes, sending his truck spinning into the westbound lane, where he and the deputy collided. In June 2023, a state judge rejected a motion by the county to dismiss the lawsuit, noting that the Charger's dashcam recorded vehicles trying to get out of Quick's way and recorded the officer's "outrageous vulgar tirade" after a driver slowed down and moved to the left to let him pass at the Taconic exit. The judge cited Quick's "indifference to the difficulties faced by motorists confronted by the blaring lights and sirens of a rapidly moving police car." The collision caused the left side of the dump truck's cab to dislodge. Quick's vehicle incurred heavy damage on the left front and side. Manzoeillo said in a deposition that he was disabled for more than two months. He said he remembered only driving west past Canopus Lake just before the crash and then hearing someone tell him to "lay back down." A state police report said Manzoeillo caused the collision by "failing to maintain his lane of travel" when he reacted and spun into the westbound lane. The county argued that Quick should receive immunity under a section of state vehicle and traffic law that gives officers leeway when responding to emergencies. Grossman acknowledged that Quick's response represented an "emergency operation" because he believed that there may be a burglary in process, but he allowed the case to proceed because Manzoeillo and his attorneys could possibly prove that Quick acted with reckless disregard. Under Sheriff's Office guidelines, deputies should only consider certain calls for an emergency response, including when pursuing or apprehending a violator or suspected violator, when an incident may involve "possible personal injury, death or significant property damage" and when there is a crime in progress. An internal investigation of the crash found that within a minute of Quick activating his sirens, one of the three deputies dispatched to the scene was told he could "disregard" the call. The report also found that Quick did not inform anyone that he was responding and he failed to use his work phone to confirm the contents of "broken radio traffic" coming from the Sheriff's Office's channel. None of the radio transmissions or onboard computer information "suggested that the activity was a possible burglary in process,'" according to the investigation. The Sheriff's Office also reviewed Quick's action...

Join Pat and Konch as they delve into recent pivotal job changes and mergers and acquisitions shaping the landscape of institutional and private wealth management. The episode kicks off with important executive movements, including the  CIO of Radnor Capital and Matt Dmytryszyn's appointment at Miracle Mile Advisors. The discussion then shifts to significant mergers, highlighting LPL Financial's addition of a top-tier advisory team and Apella Capital's strategic acquisition of ClearLogic Financial. Wrapping up, the hosts explore institutional investment strategies and new fund launches, including notable commitments by the University of Alabama System Endowment and innovative fund strategies by Taconic. This episode offers an in-depth look at the dynamic shifts within the financial services industry.

Food and Travel Nation with Elizabeth Dougherty DESTINATION UNKNOWN - TACONIC STATE PARK The TRUTH about Food and Travel Original Broadcast Date:  03/16/2024 Elizabeth takes us to Taconic State Park in upstate New York, where Mother Nature offers a sanctuary for outdoor enthusiasts seeking a solitude from the hustle and bustle of urban life. From hiking along scenic trails, to bright vibrant foliage and fishing in tranquil waters, Taconic also offers a history lesson at the Copake Iron Works Museum. Each week our listeners get the very latest food and travel information We produce homemade videos of healthy, easy to make recipes We feature no-holds barred interviews in a LIVE, fast-paced, nationwide call-in show. Elizabeth Dougherty is a writer, trained chef, world traveler and now an award-winning talk show host. Food Nation Radio was on the forefront of presenting expert guests with vital information about GMOs, at a time when no one was talking about or even knew about the subject. We give our listeners, advertisers and stations a LIVE SHOW. (NO “BEST OF'S” EVER!) We present hard-hitting topics and interviews without the same old political spin. We are very social media conscious and stay in touch with our audience. (200,000 plus) We work closely with advertisers and stations to ensure their success. We are ready to deliver a fresh, tight, first-class show to your station from our digital studio utilizing Comrex Access and our own automation system. Executive Producer – Michael Serio Requests: Sammone@proton.me FOOD AND TRAVEL NATION FAST FACTS Website: Food And Travel Nation.com Social Media Sites: Facebook | Twitter website:  FoodAndTravelNation.com email:  Elizabeth@FoodAndTravelNation.com

Steve, Darren and Clayton taste the special 10th anniversary release from Taconic Distillery. TBD music is by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com).   Important Links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theabvnetwork Check us out at: abvnetwork.com. Join the revolution by adding #ABVNetworkCrew to your profile on social media.

We are back again. This was a fun interview. Hope you enjoy it. Make sure you check out or sponsors: badmotivatorbarrels.com/shop/?aff=3 Z. Smith Whiskey and Mixology whiskeyshamanpodcast@gmail.com

In this solo podcast episode, I share highlights from his quest to play every golf course in Massachusetts. I discuss playing the US Open routing at the Country Club, playing at Willow Bend Country Club with Darren Clarke, playing at Maynard Golf Course, reconnecting with old friends and making new friendships through golf, and the joy of playing alone at Taconic and walking Pinehurst and Elie with my wife, Tiff. I reflect on the meaningful experiences and connections he has made through his golfing journey.LINKS:Subscribe to the Newsletter Baystate Golf on IGSeanMeliaGolf on TwitterBaystateGolf.com

In this podcast, Shimon Shkury, President and Founder of Ariel Property Advisors, interviews Chris Balestra, President and Chief Investment Officer of Taconic Partners, about how and why the firm began offering office space to life sciences companies and its existing and planned office and multifamily projects.

This is Bed Crime Stories - a weekly True Crime Podcast where your hosts pour themselves a drink and take turns telling one another the stories that keep them up at night! On this episode of Bed Crime Stories, Jovie tells us the incredibly upsetting and unnerving story of Diane Schuler and the HBO Documentary "There's Something Wrong with Aunt Diane". True Crime and comedy... Sounds crazy, we know. We add humor to cope with the harsh reality of the stories we tell and alleviate some of the heaviness for our listeners. No one here at Bed Crime Stories are experts, just lifelong fans of all-things true crime. Music credit Industrial Music Box by Kevin MacLeod Link: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/3910-industrial-music-box License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

We talked with with Randi Lowe about the future of the Taconic and Green for Elementary and Middle Schools.

The Seattle Mariners & Texas Rangers are the two hottest teams in the MLB right now. They continue to win games in an exciting AL West. Meanwhile, the Angels continue to sputter since the Trade Deadline. Can Shohei Ohtani win the Triple Crown? We take a look at the numbers and break down what is going to be the most difficult of the three to accomplish. Plus the NL MVP race is tightening. Who has the upper hand? Plus Cody Bellinger is playing at an MVP level for the Chicago Cubs, The Chicago White Sox had a rough weekend as Tim Anderson and Jose Ramirez got into a fight. Plus the Orioles make fools of themselves for suspending their broadcaster. This week's whiskey is Taconic Distillery's Dutchess Private Reserve Straight Bourbon Whiskey. We give our tasting notes, a breakdown of the characteristics, and rank it on our Barrels & Barrels rating scale. ⏱️⏱️VIDEO CHAPTERS⏱️⏱️ 0:00 Intro 0:20 Welcome In! 1:38 NO-HITTER! 5:00 Best # 37 Ever? 12:18 Barrell Bourbon Batch 035 Review 13:57 Merch for Sale 14:36 Taconic Review 21:27 Taconic Rating 27:24 Trivia Time 28:42 White Sox & Guardians Fight 31:08 White Sox Turmoil 40:34 Orioles Suspend their Broadcaster 47:10 Yankees & Rizzo Issues 51:32 Rays Rotation Pains 57:21 Mariners Stay Hot! 1:02:26 Rangers Keep Winning 1:06:54 Can Ohtani Win the Triple Crown? 1:11:48 NL MVP Debate 1:16:40 Cody Bellinger is ON FIRE 1:19:59 Revisiting the SS Signings 1:29:20 Power Rankings Week 19 Power Rankings Episode ⬇️ https://youtu.be/8QvktB385c0 Our MLB Top 10 Power Rankings are brought to you by 10th Mountain Whiskey & Spirit Company. Go grab a bottle of their award winning whiskey at shop.10thwhiskey.com/spirits/ and use code BNB for 10% your entire order! youtube.com/@10thmtnwhiskey https://www.instagram.com/10thmtnwhis... Download and subscribe to the pod! Spotify: https://bit.ly/BarrelsnBarrelsSpotify Apple: https://bit.ly/BarrelsnBarrelsApple Stitcher: https://bit.ly/BarrelsnBarrelsStitcher YouTube: youtube.com/@BarrelsNBarrelsPod Follow us on Social Media! Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/BarrelsnBarrelsPod/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BarrelsnBarrelsPod/ Tiktok: https://www.tiktok.com/@BarrelsnBarrelsPod/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/barrelsnbarrels T-Shirts from Charlie Mike Never Weaken Here ⬇️ https://charliemikeneverweaken.com/products/barrels-and-barrels Order Hats & Glassware Here ⬇️ https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSczRq2InAxbkeBsAFycsNnTcgZYMbdTNAtPXSpoFHetCfqEZg/viewform?usp=sf_link #mlb #Baseball #BaseballPodcast #Podcast #ShoheiOhtani #Mariners #Rangers #Angels #Cubs #BaseballTalk #WhiteSox #yankees #Astros #Rangers #orioles #bourbonreview --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barrels--barrels-podcast/support

John and Zeke take a long overdue couple of minutes together to review Taconic Distillery's Bottled-in-Bond release! Cheers!  Want some DDB merch? Head over to www.dadsdrinkingbourbonstore.com  Make sure to get your tickets for this year's Bourbon and Beyond by going to www.bourbonandbeyond.com 

Steve and Darren taste and talk about Taconic Distillery's new bottled-in-bond offering. TBD music is by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com).   Important Links: Jerry Dalton Movie: https://tinyurl.com/33buk7aw ABV Barrel Shop: abvbarrelshop.com ABV Network Shop: https://shop.abvnetwork.com/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theabvnetwork Check us out at: abvnetwork.com. Join the revolution by adding #ABVNetworkCrew to your profile on social media.

We try two releases from Taconic that Zeke brought back from NY with him when he went up to pick a couple barrels with Rochester Elite Barrel Pickers a couple months ago: a wheated bourbon whiskey and a single malt whiskey.  You can always get 15% off at ORCA Coolers by going to www.orcacoolers.com/bourbon but make sure to check out their year end clearance as some items are as much as 40% off.  Old Limestone Mixing Water is the same limestone spring water that's used to make your favorite Kentucky Bourbon. It's bottled in Central Kentucky in the heart of bourbon country. It's the perfect companion to any fine bourbon, whether you use it for your ice cubes or just add a splash to your pour. Find out more at www.oldlimestone.com  Want some DDB merch? Head over to www.dadsdrinkingbourbonstore.com 

On this episode, Devin and Lauren tell the forgotten story of Boston Corners, which once belonged to Massachusetts, but was ceded to New York state by an act of Congress in 1855. The area, now part of the Town of Ancram, was remote in the mid-19th century and hard to access from Massachusetts, while New […]

Welcome to episode 2 of the Mind, Body, Spirit, FOOD podcast! Thank you so much to all the paid subscribers who make this work possible. Today I interview physical therapist, yoga instructor, breathwork facilitator and all around amazing being Samantha Fulton. I met Sam last year when I went to her for my own physical therapy needs (diastasis recti, which was causing other issues) and was blown away by her approach to her work. She approaches each body as a whole, unique organism, where everything is connected. This resonated deeply with my philosophies around food, and we've since developed a deep connection (and, thanks to Sam, I now have a fixed diastasis!). A few weeks ago Sam and I taught a class together called Intuitive Eating & Yoga, where I shared my practices around gaining presence and freedom around food, and Sam shared yogic principles around the body as well as how the nervous system influences digestion. Today we're diving deeper into the nervous system - what it is, how it impacts our food choices, and how it affects the ways we process food. Sam also shares simple techniques to bring ourselves back to center when we're off balance. Be sure to stay tuned until the end as she offers a beautiful practice that you can implement anytime, anywhere. You'll walk away from this episode with a deeper compassion for yourself and your own natural workings. What a gift. You can listen to the podcast right here, or, better yet, subscribe to the podcast in Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or Stitcher. I've also included an edited transcript of the conversation below. Please pipe in with any questions or comments, and enjoy the show! Find Sam on social media @fulbeing_collective. Nicki: Welcome to Mind Body Spirit Food. I'm your host, Nicki Sizemore, and in this podcast we'll explore the rituals, traditions, and cultural influences around food and how they connect us to our minds, our bodies, our spirits, the earth and our communities. This is a space that's dedicated to bringing more presence, ease, and joy into the process of feeding ourselves. Let's dive in.Hello and welcome. I am so happy to have you here and I'm so excited about today's episode. I interview Samantha Fulton, who's a physical therapist yoga teacher, but you guys, she's way more than that. She approaches the body in such a beautiful way. In fact, I met her last year when I went to see her for my own physical therapy needs.But today we're talking about the nervous system and how the nervous system affects our relationship to food as well as our digestion. There are so many juicy nuggets in this episode, and I think you're going to get a lot out of it. Be sure to stay tuned until the end because Sam offers a beautiful practice for bringing our nervous systems back into calibration when we're off. And this has implications that go far wider than just bringing ourselves back to a state of homeostasis. This influences how we digest, but it also influences how we think about our own bodies. And I think throughout this episode, perhaps my hope is that you'll learn to have a little bit more compassion for yourself.All right, let's get to it.Nicki: Sam, welcome. I'm so thrilled that you are here, and that you're actually my first guest on my podcast.Sam: Ooh, I am.Nicki: Yes.Sam: I'm so happy to be here. I'm even more honored to be here now than I know I'm your first guest. I think you can only go up from here because I am not used to being interviewed. So here we go.Nicki: Not even possible. We're going to start with a question that I ask all my guests. What is your cultural upbringing and how has that influenced your relationship to food?Sam: I'm laughing and breathing. I grew up with my mom. My parents were split since I was very young. And so I lived with my mom and my younger brother, and my grandparents lived upstairs from us. So we were very extended family oriented. And my father actually lived with his parents as well, so I had it on both sides.Nicki: Wow, that's great. Or maybe not, I'm not sure!Sam: It was great. And other things. We were very Italian, and very food oriented. My grandparents were very focused on food as sort of the indicator on how everyone was doing. Food was comfort. Food meant social engagement. It meant family gatherings and family meals. But it was also, “how good you're doing.” You know, like, what's wrong? You're not hungry? Why didn't you finish your dinner? You look sad, you look tired, you look sick. Here, have something to eat.Nicki: So food was the remedy for all emotional distress.Sam: It was the remedy. Yeah. We joke that the Italian psychotherapy is, “here, just have a slice of mozzarella.” Some people say garlic is the Italian penicillin. We kind of used it to treat mental illness as well. I say that with a warm and open heart. I don't say that to mock mental illness at all. It's very present in my family. A lot of us needed other medicines too. But that's our running family joke.My mother was definitely more progressive though. I watched her try to figure it out. She worked full-time, so my grandparents were caring for us a lot, but my mom did cook very whole foods. Our meals were always very complete, so there was always a protein and a starch, and a veggie and a dessert, and we had to eat it all.Nicki: And did you eat at home most nights or was your mom cooking most nights?Sam: Yes, yes. We hardly ever went out to eat that. I remember we maybe had pizza nights on Fridays. But we definitely had a lot of family meals at home that were cooked by her or my grandparents.Nicki: So as you got older—and you can totally correct me if I'm wrong—food was medicine in a very emotional way. Food was an indicator of how good you were doing. How did that impact you as you got older and perhaps cooking for yourself?Sam: Oh, that's a good question. I think I had that food-oriented nature from my grandparents and extended family, but I also watched my mom work with her own body image issues. That probably stemmed from when she was a child—sort of unresolved issues. And it was the eighties and nineties, so it was very “low fat.” Diet culture was starting to emerge. I also got influenced by that, just watching her go through her journey. I think I did have an innate message to myself that food was a reward and I could use it as reward or punishment, which I think is a really unhealthy relationship. It's an unhealthy association.Nicki: I think that a lot of people listening can relate to that.Sam: Yeah. I mean, it's food and exercise. I'm a movement professional, so I see that happening with movement and exercise all the time. I guess I was conscious of the food aspect of it, but I didn't realize how present it was in my body, in my psyche. I try not to live that way, and I think I'm gradually becoming more conscious, but it's certainly there. Nicki: I know, It's interesting because you had an Instagram post before the holidays and it sparked an Instagram post for me talking about food—this kind of capitalistic view that we have of food, especially I think for those of us who did grow up in the eighties and nineties. It's an input versus output equation. With food and exercise that's absolutely what I was taught—you eat this much, you better work it off this much—instead of a nurturing, soft, gentle relationship. Both of us realize now that it's not input versus output. It's not how the way our bodies work. There are times in my life where I have a lot of energy and movement feels really good, and there are times in my life when I need a lot of rest.  I'm getting better at honoring those cycles, but it wasn't what I was taught.Sam: Right, right. That makes all the sense when you say it. It made me exhale. That's what I attempt to bring to my clientele about movement and exercise, and I think what you're trying to do with food, which is why we connected so much and we wanted to merge our worlds. Nicki: Well that gets me to my next question because last week we taught a class together called Intuitive Eating and Yoga and it was a really powerful class. I approached the class from the food perspective and you dove into yoga and the body, but also the nervous system. And I haven't been able to stop thinking about this topic. Before we kind of get into it, I'll ask you how you became interested in the nervous system and then we can kind of start to unravel what the nervous system even is.Sam: We can't really talk about almost anything else without holding holding and knowing [the nervous] system and our inner workings. When I work with people with pain, people with chronic illness, people with a static injury, an injury that just happened when they were doing X activity, or something more chronic—and when I listen to my own body, when I have pains myself or when I'm experiencing anxiety, whatever it might be—is that even when that symptom resolves, even when I don't have that pain anymore or it changes, or it shifts, it's not really done. The work can always continue. It's not ever the exercises or the yoga poses that create the lasting change. Actually, the lasting change comes when we learn to listen. When we learn to commit to a deeper relationship with ourselves on all levels.Nicki: I just got chills all up and down my body. Yep.Sam: Thank you. Me too. I know this, but then I forget it. So it's important to keep learning. Nicki: So, learning to listen, does that mean starting with the nervous system? Do you start there before you go deeper?Sam: Yes. And you know, the first thing we did together was breath work. Breathing is one of my favorite tools and one of the first tools that I use with myself and with others to access the nervous system. The breath is always right here. We always have the breath. We don't need anything else. If we're practiced in that, we set ourselves up to regulate our nervous system. I work with myself because I'm on my own wild and crazy journey with anxiety and ADHD.  I was diagnosed as an adult with ADHD, and when I started to learn about my brain and how I'm wired, it was so liberating. To learn that there's nothing wrong with me. There's nothing wrong with anyone. And the responses that I was experiencing in my body were an attempt at my system trying to regulate, trying to keep me safe. It's a very smart thing that my body's trying to do. To learn how I'm wired, it was like, oh my gosh. It was very liberating, and it also put a lot of tools at my fingertips.Nicki: So what is the nervous system for those of us who aren't versed in this language? I think all of us have a sense of the “fight or flight,” but can you explain what it is?Sam: Yes. Simply put, we're referring to the autonomic nervous system, which is conducted or regulated by what's called the vagus nerve. And the vagus nerve is one of our cranial nerves, so it comes from our brain—our brainstem. When I learned about the vagus nerve, it really shifted a lot of things for me. I talk a lot about the polyvagal theory. The old model of the autonomic nervous system is what we know to be our fight or flight response—that's called our sympathetic nervous system. That's our accelerator. It's what causes the response to fight or flight. In our modern world, it doesn't always look like fight with our fists or flight with our feet. It can look like a lot of other things, which we may or may not get to in this conversation, but it's very complex as to how that can show up in our bodies in our modern world where we're not fighting a bear or running away from a bear. But we are having other responses and other bodily experiences that feel quite like that. And then we have the parasympathetic nervous system (this is still the old model), which is our break. It's “rest and digest.” And the old model says one response is good, and the other is bad. One is up, the other is down. It was very polarized. The polyvagal theory was developed by a doctor by the name of Porges. If anybody's interested, you can look up Stephen Porges. He has a lot of resources on online. Be careful about other resources of the polyvagal theory. There are other good ones certainly, but there's also a lot of misinformation on the internet.Nicki: I can commisserate. In the food world there's a lot of misinformation.Sam: The polyvagal theory is a little bit nuanced; it's that the vagus nerve has two branches. We still have our sympathetic nervous system, which again, is that fight or flight response. But then our vagus nerve has two branches. One is the dorsal vagal branch, which is considered numbing, shutting down, freezing. This is that down energy.And then there's the ventral vagal branch, which is more balanced. When we're in this state and we're in this response, we are secure. We can socially engage, we can digest our food, we can sleep well. We can have healthy relationships, healthy exchanges. I'm not even going into our organ function, but all of these nervous system responses greatly influence our organs, our heart, our lungs, our digestive organs, our metabolic system. The theory teaches that there's a spectrum that we're on. It's not like I'm here, here, or here, but there's a spectrum or like a ladder on which we climb up or down. And we all have a different capacity to feel balanced. We all have what's called the “window of tolerance.” So my window of tolerance might be different from your window of tolerance. My window of tolerance today might be different than what my window of tolerance was when I was 18.It definitely changes as we change. And different stressors in our lives may shift where we are on the spectrum. And the goal is not to stay balanced all the time. A healthy nervous system is not always relaxed, is not always balanced. Nicki: I love to hear this. Sam: Isn't that good news? A healthy nervous system needs to be challenged. We need stressors and then we need the ability to recover. We need tools to recover.Nicki: And that recovery is probably the thing that's important. How do we learn how to recover whenwe do get stressed?Sam: Totally. There are also times in our lives that we need stress. This is an example, I need a little bit of that sympathetic activity, that fight or flight activity, if I am going to drive on the Taconic at night. I need a little bit of increased attention, a little vigilance. I need a little bit of that spark if I want to stay attentive. Or if I'm playing a competitive game or something along those lines, you want a little bit of oomph, you want a little bit of spice.Nicki: You know, it reminds me of cooking. Cooking for me is at one time very relaxing, and just kind of slow. But there are times when I love the energy—when seven things are cooking at once, and I get in this dance state and it's definitely elevated. I'm present and tuned in, but whew, I've got to be in that upper [state], keeping my eye on everything. But there's something exciting about that. There's something fun about that. I don't want to cook like that all the time though. I also want thosetimes where it's—Sam: And you don't want to stay there!Nicki: No, I don't want to stay there (laughing). This is why I don't work in restaurant kitchens, which I have done and which I do not enjoy because you're very much in that hyper state. But that's interesting to hear that we go back and forth and that it's not necessarily good or bad all the time. Right?Sam: Absolutely. And to give you an example on the flip side is that if I want to enjoy a quiet meal with my loved one and I really want to digest my food well, I want to be balanced, of course, but I also need a little bit of that dorsal vagal state. I need a little bit of that downward tone to my energy. That's what really gets my digestive juices flowing, and it gets me very present and relaxed in my body.Nicki: I love learning about this because our nervous system directly influences our digestion. I see digestion from a very energetic place. I literally had indigestion for five years after my youngest daughter was born because she was—I love you Juni—but she was a hard little baby and a hard toddler. I would go from rushing from work, to cooking, to eating, and I would never pause. I would never take a breath. She was a fussy baby at the dinner table and all of that built up. My digestion was so poor. It wasn't until I hit a wall with it and realized, wait a minute, I can see this pattern. I can see what's going on, and I can see how fast I'm moving, and I'm not even breathing through any of this. But while I was in it, I couldn't see it.Now, looking back, I can see that my nervous system was like, whoa come dinnertime. I mean, I've had a meditation practice for a very long time in the morning, but then I'd get into the kitchen and everything would be thrown out the window! I've been bringing these practices into the kitchen, and now I can see that these are nervous system practices in some way. I always take two deep breaths before I start cooking and before I start eating. And I engage my senses. While for me this was a way to bring more ease and joy into the process of cooking, this was also calming my nervous system. So what is that connection between food and the nervous system?Sam: The vagus nerve is actually also called the gut brain. And the heart brain. Isn't that beautiful?Nicki: Yes.Sam: Our body is always giving cues, always firing, always giving us subtle cues unless they need to be louder, right? They start subtle and when we don't listen, they get louder, but it's always giving subtle cues asking for attention here or there, asking for balance where it's needed. This internal messaging system is called interoception. We think of our senses as being sight, smell, taste, hearing and touch. But we actually have a sixth sense and it's called interoception. And it's more complex than I'm saying now, but it's basically our capacity to decipher these internal cues and sensations that we're feeling in our bodies, and then decide what we need based on those sensations. If we're constantly dysregulated or if we get stuck in that high energy state, if we get stuck in that sympathetic response, or if we're getting pulled down into that dorsal vagel state and we can't rebalance—we don't have tools to rebalance or we don't even know that we're not balanced—we get mixed up with the cues. We can't accurately decipher what the cues are telling us to do. It's easy to get the wires crossed. So for example do you ever eat when you're bored?Nicki: Yeah.Sam: Right? It's not hunger. We eat when we're bored or we don't eat when we're stressed, when we're anxious, or vice versa. These can go both ways because people manifest these things in all different ways. We scroll on our phones when we're feeling sad or when we're lonely. We just want go to sleep when we're in pain, or we can't sleep when we're overly tired. These things get really mixed up.Nicki: And so we're seeking something to fix the problem, but the thing we're seeking is not the cause of the problem. Is that right? Like we're seeking almost these numbing behaviors. Like, “oh, I'm so bored, I'm just going to eat something,” but actually the boredom is coming from somewhere else.Sam: For sure. These are all ways of scratching an itch. We're scratching a deep itch and we're not quite dropped in enough to our own systems and quite practiced in having a relationship with ourselves, so it manifests in all kinds of ways. We're all addicted to something—these little glass rectangles that we carry around in our hands all the time, they are big back scratchers for people. And food can also be, among many other things. But then a little more complexly, down to the cellular level, we can't digest food properly when we're dysregulated. Nicki: I can feel that in my body, but it's taken me years to understand that connection, and I didn't have a language for it until you and I started talking. So how do we know when we're dysregulated and how do we get back?Sam: Such a good question. There are so many symptoms of a dysregulated nervous system that will oftentimes look like other things and that oftentimes come as the result of other things as well. It helps to know if I tend to lean towards the fight or flight response. If that's my go-to, if I'm a high tension kind of person and I'm in fast forward mode all the time, it helps to know that our digestive system functions are actually very slowed down when we're in that state. You would think it's the opposite, but evolutionarily speaking, if we're running from a bear or if we're fighting the bear, we can't use energy to digest food. We need to conserve our energy—we're not going to have the right hormones released in our system, and our motility, the muscle contractions that move food through our system, that's not where we're going to use our energy.  We're using our energy in our large limb muscles. And vice versa, if we're stuck in that freeze or numb, low energy mode, our digestive system works overtime. It senses, “I don't have enough energy. Maybe I need to break down some food.” Nicki: So it tries to make up for the fact that you are feeling so low.Sam: Exactly. It tries to overcompensate. Our bodies are always doing that. They're trying to help; these responses are very smart. We have to thank our bodies for trying to keep us safe. These systems evolved over time, evolutionarily, out of necessity so that we would stay alive. It's our survival brain. And we evolved into higher thinking beings, and we do have the ability to decipher the threats, but our bodies don't know the difference. It's not conscious. A threat is a threat, and our higher thinking minds can say, “wait, is the fact that I'm stuck in traffic and I'm late for a meeting going to kill me?” But first we have to be in touch with what that response feels like in our bodies or else we can't connect to that.I mean, there are countless signs and symptoms. Chronic pain, which can either be the stressor or the stress response, a lot of the times it's both. Digestive disturbances [are another]. We always want to determine with the help of medical professionals if digestive issues are structural or physical, diet related or nervous system related. And most often it's a combo. You don't want to assume that just because I'm having stomach pain, I must be stressed. It's very important to rule out anything that's going to threaten your health. But yeah, sleep disturbances, irritability, emotional swings, brain fog, memory stuff, attention span issues, you know, the list goes on. Nicki: It's so interesting. My podcast launched last week, and I was having a somatic—a bodily—fear, and it would come and go. It was like a tightening. All of a sudden I'd be sitting there doing nothing and all of a sudden I'd have this fear response. First I felt like, okay, I need to acknowledge that I'm having this fear response. I feel like just acknowledging it is a major step in easing it. Even though the fear response persisted, I could see it, and I could say to myself, “oh, that's just fear. I can sit in the fear. My life is not threatened right now. The fear is coming from a deep, subconscious place. I will sit with you, but I don't need to change you.”What I think I would've done in the past when I was a younger person—that fear would've caused me to go do something to numb it. I don't know what that thing would've been, maybe exercise over-exercise or something to have given me a sense of control. But I think what I'm trying to say is that if we can feel these things that come in through our body and if we can name them, then it gives us that little bit of space. It feels like you have a little bit of space so you can be like, wait, “how do I want to react to this? What's the action going to be?” Or maybe there's absolutely no need for action. Maybe I just need to sit here with it.Sam: That is perfection what you just said. That's exactly it. And that comes from a deep place of self-compassion.Nicki: Hmm. Yes.Sam: And that is yoga. It's, “how do I show up for what's present, right here and now, without wanting to change it, without going on with a story about it. Just, this is what's here.”Nicki: This is what's here. So when those things show up and we're feeling stressed, we're feeling anxiety—or maybe we're feeling so low and so sluggish—and we can name it, we can have compassion for it and not judge ourselves for it, what are a few easy tools that you can give us to come back into our body? To connect, to calm, or to bring up?I know in working with you that breathwork has been really powerful for me in either calming the the nervous system and in invigorating myself to get moving when I am in that stuck overwhelmed state.Do you have any tips?Sam: Ah, I do. And you already introduced one, when you were saying, “when I can name it, it's very liberating.” To say something, to call it what it is, to say it out loud or in your mind, it's very, very powerful. One of my favorite go-to's is a body scan and name the sensations. We can do this with physical sensations, we can do it with pain, we can do it with hunger (or something that we are interpreting as hunger and we're not quite sure). We can do it with thirst, we can do it with emotional feelings. Whatever arises, we can do this. And even if it's emotional in nature, even if you're feeling sad or fearful, our emotions live in our bodies. Whatever is in our head is in our body.Nicki: Ah, right.Sam: So I like to either sit or lay down. And start at the very top of my head and bring my awareness there. If people are trying this at home, bring the awareness through the body, from the head, into the face, into the neck and shoulders, down the arms, into the hands, down the front of the body, the chest, the ribs, the belly, the spine from the neck down to the lower back, the pelvis and the hips, the thighs, the knees, the lower legs, the ankles, the feet, and out through the toes.See what's talking, if there's a sensation anywhere. Stay with it for a few breaths. And I love to use the phrase, “here and now I feel.” We might have a tendency to go on in our minds like, oh, you know, “here in my shoulder now I feel a tightness. Oh, well that's because I have bad posture.” We might have a tendency to attach reasoning or story or dialogue about it. And the practice is really just to describe the sensation. Here and now I feel a tightness. Here and now I feel a burn. Here and now I feel a poke. Right? Whatever it might be. Or here and now I feel joy. Here and now I feel fullness. Here and now I feel space. It can be anything. Taking a few breaths with just those describing words, with the intention of allowing it to be exactly as it is without changing it, is very powerful.Nicki: it's full acceptance, isn't it. In my body the way I feel that is, when I fully accept something, I stop resisting it. And when I stop resisting it, guess what? It can move through me. When I try to battle something within my body, it gets even more deeply lodged.Sam: Mm-hmm. Again, it comes from a place of self-compassion. We don't need any extra blame or shame or judgment about what we're feeling. Especially if what we're already feeling is hard.Nicki: Yes. Thank you. Amen.Sam: I'll also just say that there are different approaches. This technique, if it's not resonating, that's okay. There are a vast variety of approaches for folks if if they really want to get in touch with their nervous system. There are what's called top-down tools, which work with how our thoughts and beliefs affect our system and affect our bodies, which can be very powerful. This is like psychotherapy, group therapy, awareness practices like meditation, affirmations and intention settings. These can be really great tools for people who that resonates with. That top down approach from my brain to my body. And if that tends to not work for you, the bottom up approach is using our body and our breath to connect to our brain, to affect our brain. This is like breathing exercises, movement, postural positioning, body work, play, and even certain foods and drink. How does a mug of hot tea make you feel if your energy is up high? Or if your energy is down low, how does a citrusy sip of water feel? Again, it's understanding interoception sense, which practices like the body scan can really help hone. Then we start to know what tools will work for us.Nicki: Yeah, because the vagus nerve is a two-way street, right? So information goes from our brain to down into our body, but also from our body up into our brain. So if we can see that and manipulate—not manipulate that, that's the wrong word—but we can come at it from both ways. For me, that just gives me an extra little superpower where if my body is feeling this way, let's bring it up to my brain, or vice versa. There's knowledge both places. Sam: Oh you are so saying it. And you're also holding two truths. It's not the brain that directs the body, and it's not the body that directs the brain. They have a symbiotic relationship. Part of the reason why I love breath so much—part of the reason why that's one of my favorite things in the world—is because our respiratory system is the only—it's one of our autonomic nervous system functions, right? The others are our cardiovascular system, our digestive system, our metabolic system. Those things are always happening all the time. They happen automatically in our sleep. We're not thinking about it. We're digesting food. Our hearts are beating. There's a lot going on without our decision making to make it happen. But our respiratory system is the only autonomic function that is both. It's going all the time—we're breathing even when we're not thinking about it. And then we can also consciously change the breath at any moment in time.It's both voluntary and involuntary. So that's my next go-to tool. The first was the body scan with naming the sensations, and the second tool is breath. The most basic breathing pattern, if you've never worked with your breath before, there's something in the yoga practice called equal breath. It's a one-to-one ratio. I like it because it's very accessible. You can do it anywhere, and you can also pace yourself quite easily. You don't have to match anybody else's breath.You would start by just first paying attention to how your breath feels naturally and not try to change it.And you can bring a count to your in-breath, and whatever that count was—maybe you only breathe in for two—you try to breathe out for two. You match the exhale to the inhale. Then over time it might feel accessible to increase by one beat, the in-breath and the out-breath.This rhythm starts to naturally soothe the nervous system. There's a pulsating thing that our internal workings are just vibing with. It's very similar to rocking a baby. It occupies something in our brains—we don't want to be so busy, we don't want to be so scattered. It hones our attention. It's extremely powerful.Nicki: Sam, thank you so much. I feel so calm and content just from hearing you, just from witnessing and practicing these practices with you. And I hope that those of you listening out there, I hope you give these a try. Let us know where we can find you in the world?Sam: I'm a little hidden. I need help getting more present on social media and on the internet. I'm much better in person one-on-one, so, oh my gosh, I would love to meet you all in person. But my website is fulbeingphysicaltherapy.com. My Instagram page is @fulbeing_collective. And I hope to do another Intuitive Eating and Yoga workshop with you, Nicki. So your folks will definitely hear about that.Nicki: I want to thank you for these amazing teach teachings, for introducing us to the nervous system and for giving us all some—oh gosh, I'm going to say this—food for thought. Sorry, that was bad. But the nervous system, how it influences how we're eating and how we're feeling, I just feel like being granted this knowledge—just like you said—makes me feel more compassionate for myself. If there's a better gift out there, I don't know what it is. So thank you for that. And thank you for sharing your beautiful breathwork practices with us.Sam: Thank you so much for having me. I'm so grateful to be connected to you in this way and to connect with your communityNicki: All right. Until next time. Thank you so much for listening. If this work resonates with you in any way, you can support it by leaving a review or comment or sharing it with friends. Also, you can sign up for the newsletter, Mind, Body, Spirit, FOOD, and by becoming a paid member for just $5 a month you help fund this entire project. Thank you so much to all of you who are already subscribed, especially to those paid subscribers. This work could not happen without you. I'm Nicki Sizemore, and as always, remember to nourish yourself with intention and love. Get full access to Mind, Body, Spirit, FOOD at mindbodyspiritfood.substack.com/subscribe

PLEASE NOTE: Our Winter Term Registration is now OPEN! Four courses will be IN-PERSON at Noble Horizons; Only two courses will be on ZOOM. When you want to enter a TLC Zoom class, click here TLC is a non-profit membership organization providing the opportunity for lifelong learning to residents of the Northwest Corner of Connecticut and adjacent communities in New York and Massachusetts. TLC's courses cover a wide variety of academic subjects taught by volunteers, all experts in their fields. Click on Course Listings on the left to see what courses we offer. Annual membership dues of $60 per person are fully tax-deductible. There are no other set fees. Individuals may sign up for any number of courses. Classes lasting two hours are held once a week at one of our three conveniently located venues. Attendees are free to come and go as they like; there are no exams. Those taking advantage of TLC's program will rekindle the excitement of learning, expand their horizons, be able to share their knowledge, have fun and make new friends. TLC is a wonderful way to stay involved and well informed. Join today! For more information, click on an item on the left, or contact us by mail or by phone. Taconic Learning Center, Inc. PO BOX 1752, Lakeville, CT 06039 Tel. 860-364-9363 Courses for Winter 2023 Please select "Registration" on the left to register. Click here to enter Zoom meeting for any of the Zoom-based TLC Courses For your Information: Meeting ID: 893 2055 3978. Passcode: 128295 https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89320553978?pwd=Y3lSYk5jUHN5ZFhvOWp6azBOWHMwdz09 Location: Noble Horizons Times: Monday, 10am-Noon Dates: Jan 16 - Feb 20 Sessions: 6 decorative leaf MEN PLAN, THE GODS LAUGH, PART II Sessions One and Two: Gen. Burgoyne's campaign to take Albany, NY (ended at Saratoga) and Gen. Clinton's campaign to take Philadelphia, in the American Revolution. No cooperation! Sessions three and four: General Lee's two invasions of the North ending in the battle of Gettysburg. Bloody! Session five: Admiral Yamamoto's campaign to take Wake Island in WW II. A disaster! Session six: Examples of three important elements in waging war: -Tactics: Hannibal and the Battle of Cannae, 262 BC. -Weapons: Henry V and the Battle of Agincourt, 1415 AD -Misdirection: Invasion of Sicily, WW II, and "The Man Who Never Was" Instructor: Thomas Key See this instructor's bio Get Class List Location: Noble Horizons Times: Monday, 1-3pm Dates: Jan 16 - Feb 20 Sessions: 6 decorative leaf The Perennial Questions Why are we here? Who am I? What is true? Human beings have posed these questions as long as they have been able to think. In this six-week class we will take a look at a few of the most enduring approaches to these questions. We will consider ideas about the purpose of human life, the means and ends of self-knowledge, and the challenge of discerning what is really true. Instructor: Lyn Mattoon See this instructor's bio Get Class List Location: ZOOM Times: Tuesday, 1-3pm Dates: Jan 17 - March 7 Sessions: 8 decorative leaf Alexis de Tocqueville: Democracy in America In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville, a young French aristocrat, traveled to America and found the future. The nations of the earth, he concluded, or at least the enlightened part of them, were moving inevitably toward a condition of social equality that in the world of politics was taking the form of democracy. This new kind of polity was rising on the ruins of the old, hierarchical societies, and the young republic was the clearest example of it. Previous visitors from overseas had concentrated on the minutiae of daily American life, but Tocqueville was after bigger game. He wanted to tease out the broad implications of increasing social equality and democracy rather than focus on the details that were bound to differ from one nation to another. These implications then would have the widest possible relevance to the various societies of the emerging modern world. This new dispensation, Tocqueville realized, was full of both promise and peril, and he devoted himself to transmitting this balanced assessment to his European contemporaries. The book that resulted, Democracy in America, has been called the "greatest work ever written about one country by a citizen of another." Because his conclusions were so general and of such wide application his book appropriately addressed the Americans of his own time, his fellow citizens in France still trying to come to terms with the modern world, and, not least, speaks to our own distracted society today, the uneasy inheritor of the raw republic in whose image he saw the future. I'll include a PowerPoint presentation to illustrate my talks. Instructor: Robert Rumsey See this instructor's bio Get Class List Location: Noble Horizons Times: Wednesday, 1-3pm Dates: Jan 18 - Feb 22 Sessions: 6 decorative leaf Experimental Cinema: A six-session session course on the history and the development of Experimental Cinema This course attempts to present the participants a historical view of the genre, styles and the role of the filmmakers who developed and perfected the concept and the vision of Experimental Cinema. Invention of the movie camera offered a broad and diverse tool for artists to express their own interpretation of nature and life around them. Camera became another tool, a "brush" for artists to create moving images which projected their own aesthetic principles and perceptions. There will be a presentation of early cinema from France, Soviet Union, England and the United States. Early films by the Lumiere Brothers to Andy Warhol and how through ages, cinema has evolved from a vehicle to tell a story or document everyday life, to a tool expressing an individual artist's personal vision. Through the sessions of the lectures there will be an ongoing discussion about the goal for Experimental Films, which is to place the viewer in a more active and more thoughtful relationship to the film, which will be discussed. The 6 sessions will be an opportunity for the participants to understand this particular form of cinema and the various expressions and theorizations from various artists. The sessions will be coordinated with projections of stills from movies and at the end of each session there will be screening of a film, and an open discussion by the participants. During the entire sessions of the courses, informal and open-minded discussions of opinions will be encouraged. SPECIAL NOTE: Donald Sosin who is a well regarded musician and has composed musical scores for may experimental films will be appearing at the Wednesday, January 18th session for the Experimental Cinema. please see details below. Donald Sosin is one of the world's foremost silent film composers, performing his keyboard and instrumental scores all over the world. From 1971 to the present he has performed at many of the world's leading venues for silent film, including Lincoln Center, MoMA, BAM, the TriBeCa Film Festival, and many festivals including Telluride, Denver, San Francisco and Seattle, as well as AFI Silver, the Yorkshire Silent Film Festival, the Thailand Silent FIlm Festival, Italy's two major festivals in Bologna and Pordenone, and the Jecheon International Music and Film Festival in South Korea. Donald and his wife Joanna Seaton are the only people in the world who have created a repertoire of new songs for silent films, and have performed at many of the above venues, as well as at many colleges (Yale, Emory, Brown,etc.) They teach workshops in silent film music, and created scores for over 60 DVD/Blu-Ray releases on the Criterion, Kino, Milestone, Flicker Alley and other labels. With klezmer violinist Alicia Svigals, Donald has written and recorded three scores for Jewish-themed silents which they perform live all over the US and Europe under the auspices of the Sunrise Foundation for Education and the Arts. Donald grew up in Rye NY and Munich and played on Broadway for many years, after composition studies at Michigan and Columbia. His music has been heard on PBS, TCM, online, and in the concert hall. Donald and Joanna have two musical children and live in Lakeville CT. Website: oldmoviemusic.com Avant-garde filmography: Donald was commissioned to score the following films for two major collections of avant-garde films, Bruce Posner's Unseen Cinema collection, and Kino's Avant-garde DVD set. Piano except as indicated Anémic Cinéma (1924-26) Rrose Sélavy aka Marcel Duchamp Beggar on Horseback (fragment, 1925) James Cruze Bronx Morning, A (1931) Jay Leyda (chamber ensemble) Coney Island at Night (1905) Edwin S. Porter Enchanted City, The (1922) Warren Newcombe Ghost Train, The (1903) unknown Ghosts Before Breakfast (1928) Hans Richter H20 (1929) Ralph Steiner Hearts of Age, The (1934) William Vance & Orson Welles Jack and the Beanstalk (1902) Edwin S. Porter Life and Death of 9413: A Hollywood Extra, The (1927) Robert Flaherty & Slavko Vorkapich Looney Lens: Pas de Deux (1924) Al Brick Love of Zero, The (1928) Robert Florey & William Cameron Menzies Manhatta (1921) Charles Sheeler & Paul Strand (orchestra) Pie in the Sky (1934-35) Elia Kazan, Ralph Steiner & Irving Lerner Retour à la Raison, Le (1923) Man Ray Skyscraper Symphony (1929) Robert Flaherty Telltale Heart, The (1928) Charles Klein Twenty-Four Dollar Island (c. 1926) Robert Flaherty (voice and synthesized orchestra, percussion) Überfall (1928) Instructor: Varoujan Froundjian Get Class List Location: Noble Horizons Times: Thursday, 10am-Noon Dates: Jan 19 - March 9 Sessions: 8 decorative leaf Unsung Heroes of WWII We all know of Winston Churchill, FDR, Dwight Eisenhower; the Battle of Britain, the Battle of the Bulge, and more. What most of us do not know of are the unsung heroes of World War II, those who contributed significantly to the Allies' victory: men and women who were critical to the war effort but engaged in clandestine operations; men and women who provided essential services to the Allied effort. This course is both a lecture by Lynne Olson (author of Citizens of London and other exceptional books) together with classes led by Larry and Carol Rand. Instructor: Larry&Carol Rand Get Class List Location: Zoom Times: Friday, 1-3pm Dates: Jan 20 - March 10 Sessions: 8 decorative leaf Shakespeare Playreading We'll read aloud and discuss Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night's Dream . The two plays are often called "festive" comedies because each commemorates a significant day marked by popular license in the Elizabethan calendar. Twelfth Night refers to the last night of the twelve days of Christmas, and in spite of its religious origin it was a thoroughly secular celebration. A Midsummer Night's Dream takes its title from the evening before midsummer day, the summer solstice and the longest day of the year, when the prospect of warmth and lengthening days inspired much misbehavior. If time permits, we'll also read Troilus and Cressida, one of Shakespeare's so-called "problem plays," which contain both tragic and comic elements and thus resist easy placement in the canon. I'll scroll the texts of the plays on your screens. Instructor: Robert Rumsey See this instructor's bio Get Class List

PLEASE NOTE: Our Winter Term Registration is now OPEN! Four courses will be IN-PERSON at Noble Horizons; Only two courses will be on ZOOM. When you want to enter a TLC Zoom class, click here TLC is a non-profit membership... Read More ›

Frank Brosens is a co-founder of Taconic Capital, an $8 billion event-driven, multi-strategy hedge fund founded in 1999. Frank started his career at Goldman Sachs, where he joined and later ran Bob Rubin's legendary risk arbitrage desk. That group became one of the top breeding grounds for hedge fund founders, including among its ranks Tom Steyer at Farallon, Richard Perry at Perry Partners, Danny Och at Och-Ziff Capital, Eddie Lampert at ESL, Eric Mindich at Eton Park, and Dinakar Singh at TPG-Axon. Our conversation covers Frank's path to the Goldman risk arb desk, the culture that made it a success, and his eventual decision to leave the firm. We then discuss the founding of Taconic, its partnership and investment philosophy, and its approach to risk management, capital allocation, and the pursuit of opportunities. Along the way, Frank highlights examples that demonstrate the benefits of a carefully aligned culture for teammates and clients across organizational structure, portfolio management, and compensation. Access Stream by AlphaSense Free Trial Learn More Follow Ted on Twitter at @tseides or LinkedIn Subscribe to the mailing list Access Transcript with Premium Membership

PLEASE NOTE: Fall Term Registration is now open! Click on Course Listings on the left for more information Classes start on Monday, September 12th When you want to enter a TLC Zoom class, click here TLC is a non-profit membership organization providing the opportunity for lifelong learning to residents of the Northwest Corner of Connecticut and adjacent communities in New York and Massachusetts. TLC's courses cover a wide variety of academic subjects taught by volunteers, all experts in their fields. Click on Course Listings on the left to see what courses we offer. Annual membership dues of $60 per person are fully tax-deductible. There are no other set fees. Individuals may sign up for any number of courses. Classes lasting two hours are held once a week at one of our three conveniently located venues. Attendees are free to come and go as they like; there are no exams. Those taking advantage of TLC's program will rekindle the excitement of learning, expand their horizons, be able to share their knowledge, have fun and make new friends. TLC is a wonderful way to stay involved and well informed. Join today! For more information, click on an item on the left, or contact us by mail or by phone. Taconic Learning Center, Inc. PO BOX 1752, Lakeville, CT 06039 Tel. 860-364-9363

PLEASE NOTE: Fall Term Registration is now open! Click on Course Listings on the left for more information Classes start on Monday, September 12th When you want to enter a TLC Zoom class, click here TLC is a non-profit membership... Read More ›

Frank takes us through the taste notes of Taconic whiskey. For this "Thirsty Thursday" he is tasting the Mizunara Cask Finished Bourbon expression.  To know more about Taconic and all the other expressions, be sure to visit https://www.taconicdistillery.com/.  Be sure to follow Frank on his IG @bourbeyourenthusiasm Looking for a new glass to try your whiskey? Check out WHISDOM GLASS Use code TTIBP to get 10% of your first purchase.  #whiskey #bourbon #mizunara#newyork --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/hoodsom/support

On a summer day in 2009, Diane Schuler drives home from a camping trip with the most precious cargo in the world: five young children. Diane begins the nearly three hour car ride by drinking to excess and then crashing  headfirst into oncoming traffic.Diane's actions killed a total of eight people including four of the children. The very nature of this crime is heavily debated. Was Diane suicidal? Was she a family annihilator? Was Diane a closet alcoholic? Let's talk about with with special guest host Alex. 

On the first episode of TGB Live: Knight Time Edition, Joey, Greg, and Bruce talk up the Taconic with very special guest Luke Bemand, bassist for lespecial! Microplastics and more make the cut, along with a recap of weekend festivities at Pigeons Playing Ping Pong, The Greyboy Allstars, and Mt. Joy. The hosts also talk with Luke about the recently wrapped lespecial tour, as well as what fans can expect from the band this weekend for their headlining show at the Gramercy Theatre in New York City. Join the guys for their first night ride #downthepathway to…upstate New York!Stay in touch!FB: The Great BeyondIG: @thegreatbeyondpodcastTW: @greatbeyondpodFor more information on Osiris Media visit:https://www.osirispod.com/The Great Beyond is a production of Osiris Media. It is hosted by Greg Knight, Bruce Robinson, and Joey Parisi. The Great Beyond is mixed and edited by Greg Knight at his apartment in Brooklyn, NY. The executive producers of The Great Beyond are Brian Brinkman, Matt Dwyer & RJ Bee. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On the first episode of TGB Live: Knight Time Edition, Joey, Greg, and Bruce talk up the Taconic with very special guest Luke Bemand, bassist for lespecial! Microplastics and more make the cut, along with a recap of weekend festivities at Pigeons Playing Ping Pong, The Greyboy Allstars, and Mt. Joy. The hosts also talk with Luke about the recently wrapped lespecial tour, as well as what fans can expect from the band this weekend for their headlining show at the Gramercy Theatre in New York City. Join the guys for their first night ride #downthepathway to…upstate New York!Stay in touch!FB: The Great BeyondIG: @thegreatbeyondpodcastTW: @greatbeyondpodFor more information on Osiris Media visit:https://www.osirispod.com/The Great Beyond is a production of Osiris Media. It is hosted by Greg Knight, Bruce Robinson, and Joey Parisi. The Great Beyond is mixed and edited by Greg Knight at his apartment in Brooklyn, NY. The executive producers of The Great Beyond are Brian Brinkman, Matt Dwyer & RJ Bee. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Spring Term Registration is Open. PLEASE NOTE: most courses will use Zoom, but two courses will be in-person at Noble Horizons and Geer Village Be aware, however, that circumstances related to COVID could force the cancellation of the in-person classes at Noble and/or Geer. At this time, we are hoping for the best. TLC is a non-profit membership organization providing the opportunity for lifelong learning to residents of the Northwest Corner of Connecticut and adjacent communities in New York and Massachusetts. TLC's courses cover a wide variety of academic subjects taught by volunteers, all experts in their fields. Click on Course Listings on the left to see what courses we offer. Annual membership dues of $60 per person are fully tax-deductible. There are no other set fees. Individuals may sign up for any number of courses. Classes lasting two hours are held once a week at one of our three conveniently located venues. Attendees are free to come and go as they like; there are no exams. Those taking advantage of TLC's program will rekindle the excitement of learning, expand their horizons, be able to share their knowledge, have fun and make new friends. TLC is a wonderful way to stay involved and well informed. Join today! For more information, click on an item on the left, or contact us by mail or by phone. Taconic Learning Center, Inc. PO BOX 1752, Lakeville, CT 06039 Tel. 860-364-9363 Click Here to go to online Registration, or to print course descriptions, or Registration form

In today's episode the THRE3 of us talk about the infamous Taconic Parkway Crash that resulted in 8 fatalities, and about Diane Schuler who caused the accident. For years questions and theories have surrounded Diane, her husband and the reason the crash took place at all. Was this a simple case of drunk driving that resulted in tragedy, or is there more to the story?

On July 26, 2009, 36 year-old Diane Schuler drove the wrong way down the Taconic State Parkway in New York. This caused a collision that killed eight people including herself. The circumstances behind it are weird, and the theories can be frustrating, to say the least. Let us know what you think, Chatters! The full podcast is available on Saturday, February 26, 2022!Plus, full video episodes are only available on Patreon! As a subscriber, you will get access to all the goods, to include free merchandise and to watch full video episodes. Visit https://www.patreon.com/crimechatwith... to become a #VIPChatter!FOLLOW US ONFacebook: @CrimeChatwithNatandKatTwitter: @crimechatwithnatandkatInstagram: @crimechatnkLISTEN ONRSS: https://media.rss.com/crimechatwithnatandkatApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/.../crimechat.../id1595957850Google: https://podcasts.google.com/.../aHR0cHM6Ly9tZWRpYS5yc3MuY...Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5bRhHtVZ14DSfyF4AoTbMU

Professor Michael Strevens discusses the line between scientific knowledge and everything else, the contrast between what scientists as people do and the formalized process of science, why Kuhn and Popper are both right and both wrong, and more. Michael is a professor of Philosophy at New York University where he studies the philosophy of science and the philosophical implications of cognitive science. He's the author of the outstanding book “The Knowledge Machine” which is the focus of most of our conversation. Two ideas from the book that we touch on: 1. “The iron rule of science”. The iron rule states that “`[The Iron Rule] directs scientists to resolve their differences of opinion by conducting empirical tests rather than by shouting or fighting or philosophizing or moralizing or marrying or calling on a higher power` in the book Michael Makes a strong argument that scientists following the iron rule is what makes science work. 2. “The Tychonic principle.” Named after the astronomer Tycho Brahe who was one of the first to realize that very sensitive measurements can unlock new knowledge about the world, this is the idea that the secrets of the universe lie in minute details that can discriminate between two competing theories. The classic example here is the amount of change in star positions during an eclipse dictated whether Einstein or Newton was more correct about the nature of gravity. Links Michael's Website The Knowledge Machine on BetterWorldBooks Michael Strevens talks about The Knowledge Machine on The Night Science Podcast  Michael Strevens talks about The Knowledge Machine on The Jim Rutt Show    Automated Transcript [00:00:35] In this conversation. Uh, Professor Michael And I talk about the line between scientific knowledge and everything else. The contrast between what scientists as people do and the formalized process of science, why Coon and popper are both right, and both wrong and more. Michael is a professor of philosophy at New York university, where he studies the philosophy of science and the philosophical implications [00:01:35] of cognitive science. He's the author of the outstanding book, the knowledge machine, which is the focus of most of our conversation. A quick warning. This is a very Tyler Cowen ESCA episode. In other words, that's the conversation I wanted to have with Michael? Not necessarily the one that you want to hear. That being said I want to briefly introduce two ideas from the book, which we focus on pretty heavily. First it's what Michael calls the iron rule of science. Direct quote from the book dine rule states that the iron rule direct scientists to resolve their differences of opinion by conducting empirical tests, rather than by shouting or fighting or philosophizing or moralizing or marrying or calling on a higher power. In the book, Michael makes a strong argument that scientist's following the iron rule is what makes science work. The other idea from the book is what Michael calls the Taconic principle. Named after the astronomer Tycho Brahe, who is one of the first to realize that very sensitive measurements can unlock new [00:02:35] knowledge about the world. This is the idea that the secrets of the universe that lie into my new details that can discriminate between two competing theories. The classic example, here is the amount of change in a Star's position during an eclipse dictating whether Einstein or Newton was more correct about the nature of gravity. So with that background, here's my conversation with professor Michael strengthens. [00:02:58] Ben: Where did this idea of the, this, the sort of conceptual framework that you came up with come from? Like, what's like almost the story behind the story here. [00:03:10] Michael: Well, there is an interesting origin story, or at least it's interesting in a, in a nerdy kind of way. So it was interested in an actually teaching the, like what philosophers call that logic of confirmation, how, how evidence supports or undermines theories. And I was interested in getting across some ideas from that 1940s and fifties. Scientists philosophers of science these days [00:03:35] look back on it and think of as being a little bit naive and clueless. And I had at some point in trying to make this stuff appealing in the right sort of way to my students so that they would see it it's really worth paying attention. And just not just completely superseded. I had a bit of a gear shift looking at it, and I realized that in some sense, what this old theory was a theory of, wasn't the thing that we were talking about now, but a different thing. So it wasn't so much about how to assess how much a piece of evidence supports a theory or undermines it. But was it more a theory of just what counts as evidence in the first place? And that got me thinking that this question alone is, could be a important one to, to, to think about now, I ended up as you know, in my book, the knowledge machine, I'm putting my finger on that as the most important thing in all of science. And I can't say it at that point, I had yet had that idea, but it was, [00:04:35] it was kind of puzzling me why it would be that there would, there would be this very kind of objective standard for something counting is evidence that nevertheless offered you more or less, no help in deciding what the evidence was actually telling you. Why would, why would this be so important at first? I thought maybe, maybe it was just the sheer objectivity of it. That's important. And I still think there's something to that, but the objectivity alone didn't seem to be doing enough. And then I connected it with this idea in Thomas Kuhn's book, the structure of scientific revolutions that, that science is is a really difficult pursuit that I've heard. And of course it's wonderful some of the time, but a lot of. requires just that kind of perseverance in the face of very discouraging sometimes. Oh, it's I got the idea that this very objective standard for evidence could be playing the same role that Coon Coon thought was played by what he called the paradigm bar, providing a kind of a very objective framework, which is also a kind of a safe framework, [00:05:35] like a game where everyone agrees on the rules and where people could be feeling more comfortable about the validity and importance of what they were doing. Not necessarily because they would be convinced it would lead to the truth, but just because they felt secure in playing a certain kind of game. So it was a long, it was a long process that began with this sort of just something didn't seem right about these. It didn't seem right that these ideas from the 1940s and fifties could be so, so so wrong as answers to the question. Philosophers in my generation, but answering. Yeah, no, it's, [00:06:11] Ben: I love that. I feel in a way you did is like you like step one, sort of synthesized Coon and popper, and then went like one step beyond them. It's, it's this thing where I'm sure you'd go this, this, the concept that whenever you have like two, two theories that seem equally right. But are [00:06:35] contradictory, that demand is like that, that is a place where, you know, you need more theory, right? Because like, you look at popper and it's like, oh yeah, that seems, that seems right. But then there's you look at Kuhn and you're like, oh, that seems right. And then you're like, wait a minute. Because like, they sort of can't both live in the broom without [00:06:56] Michael: adding something. Although there is something there's actually something I think. Pop Harrington about Koons ideas now. And there's lots of things that are very unpopped period, but you know, Papa's basic idea is science proceeds through reputation and Koons picture of science is a little bit like a very large scale version of that, where we're scientists now, unlike in Papa's story by scientists, we're all desperately trying to undermine theories, you know, the great Britain negative spirits. And with, with, they just assume that that prevailing way of doing things, the paradigm is going to work out okay. But in presuming that they push it to its breaking point. And [00:07:35] that process, if you kind of take a few steps back, has the look of pop and science in the sense that, in the sense that scientists, but now unwittingly rather than with their critical faculties, fully engaged and wittingly are, are taking the theory to a point where it just cannot be sustained anymore in the face of the evidence. And it progresses made because the theory just becomes antenna. Some other theory needs to be counted. So there's at, at the largest scale, there's this process of that, of success of reputation and theories. Now, Coon reputation is not quite the right word. That sounds too orderly and logical to capture what it's doing, but it is nevertheless, there is being annihilated by facts and in a way that's actually quite a period. I think that interesting. [00:08:20] Ben: So it's like, like you could almost phrase Coon as like systemic pop area. Isn't right. To like no individual scientist is trying to do reputation, but then you have like the system eventually [00:08:35] refutes. And that like, that is what the paradigm shift [00:08:37] Michael: is. That's exactly right. Oh, [00:08:39] Ben: that's fast. Another thing that I wanted to ask before we dig into the actual meat of the book is like, wow, this is, this is almost a very, very selfish question, but like, why should people care about this? Like, I really care about it. There's some, and by this, I mean like sort of the, like theories of how science works, right? Like, but I know, I know many scientists who don't care. They're just like, I tried to, I talked to them about that because then they're like, like I just, you know, it's like I do, I do. I think, [00:09:12] Michael: you know, in a way that, and that's completely fine, you know, people to drive a car, you don't know how the engine works. And in fact the best drivers may not have very much mechanical understanding at all. And it's fine for scientists to be a part of the system and do what the system requires of them without really grasping how it works most of the time. 1, 1, 1 way it becomes important is when people start wanting.[00:09:35] Science might not be improved in some ways. So there's a few, there's always a little bit of that going on at the margin. So some string theorists now want to want to relax the standards for what counts as a, as a acceptable scientific arguments so that the elegance or economy of an explanation kind of officially count in favor of a theory as well as, as well as the empirical evidence in the fashion sense. Or there's, there's quite a bit of, of momentum for reform of the publishing system and science coming out of things like the replicability crisis, the idea that actually that, you know, it's talking about science as a game, but science has been gamified to the point where it's being gamed. Yes. And so, you know, there a certain kind of ambitious individual goes into science and yeah, not necessarily. One who has no interest in knowledge, but they, once they see what the rules are, they cannot resist playing those rules to the, to the limit. And what you get is a sequence of scientists sometimes call it the least publishable unit. That's tiny little [00:10:35] results that are designed more to be published and cited in advance of scientist's career than to be the most useful, a summary of research. And then you, and you get time to simply then even worse, choosing their research direction, less out of curiosity, or the sense that they can really do something valuable for the world at large then because they see a narrower and shorter term opportunity to make their own name. Know that's not always a bad thing, but you know, no system of no system of rules, as perfect as people explain the rules more and more that the direction of science as a whole can start to veer a little bit away. Now it's a complicated issue because you changed the rules and you may lose a lot of what's good about the system. Things that you may, it may all look like it's very noble and, and so on, but you can still lose some of what's good about the system as well as fixing what's bad. So I think it's really important to understand how the whole thing works before just charging in and, and, and making a whole series of reforms. [00:11:34] Ben: [00:11:35] Yeah. Okay. That makes a lot of sense. It's like, what are the, what are the actual, like core pieces that, that drive the engine? [00:11:42] Michael: So that's the practical, that's the practical side of the answer to your question. You might, people should care. I thing it's a fascinating story. I mean, I love these kinds of stories. Like the Coon story, where we're at turn, everything turns out to be working in completely different way from the way it seems to be working with that ideology turns out to be not such a great guide to the actual mechanics of the thing. Yeah, [00:12:03] Ben: yeah, no, I mean, yeah. I think that I like that there are some people who just like, think it's fascinating and it's like also just. My, my bias has also the, like how it sort of like weaves between history, right? Like you have to like, really like, look at all of these like fascinating case studies and be like, oh, what's actually going on there. So actually to build on two things you just said could, could you make the argument that with the ref replicability crisis and [00:12:35] like sort of this idea of like P hacking, you're actually seeing, you're seeing what you like th the, the mechanisms that you described in the book in play where it sort of, it used to be that looking at P values was like, like having a good P value was considered sufficient evidence, but then we like now see that, like, having that sufficient P value doesn't, isn't actually predictive. And so now. Everybody is sort of starting to say like, well, maybe like that, that P felt like the using P value as evidence is, is no longer sufficient. And so, because the, the observations didn't match the, the, like what is considered evidence it's like the, what is considered evidence is evolving. Is that like, basically like a case, like, [00:13:29] Michael: exactly. That's exactly right. So the, the whole, the significance testing is one of these, it's a [00:13:35] particular kind of instanciation of the sort of broadest set of rules. We, this whole rule based approach to science where you set up things. So that it's very clear what counts as, as publishable evidence, you have to have a statistically significant results in that P P value testing and stuff is the, is the most widespread of kind of way of thinking about statistical significance. So it's all very straightforward, you know, exactly what you have to do. I think a lot of. Great scientific research has been done and that under that banner, yeah. Having the rules be so clear and straightforward rather than just a matter of some, the referees who referee for journals, just making their own minds up about whether this result looks like a good mind or not. It's really helped science move forward. And given scientists the security, they need to set up research the research programs that they've set up. It's all been good, but because it sort of sets up this very specific role it's possible to, for the right kind of Machiavellian mind to [00:14:35] look at those rules and say, well, let me see. I see some ways, at least in some, in some domains of research where there's plentiful data or it's fairly easy to generate. I see ways that I can officially follow the rules and yet, and technically speaking, what I'm doing is publishing something that's statistically significant and yet. Take a step back. And what happens is, is you may end up with a result, know there's the John you need is one of the, one of the big commentators on this stuff has result. Most published research is false in the title of one of his most famous papers. So you need to step back and say, okay, well, the game was working for a while. It was really, we had the game aligned to people's behavior with what, with what was good for all of us. Right. But once certain people started taking advantage of it in certain fields, at least it started not working so well. We want to hang on to the value we get out of having [00:15:35] very clear objective rules. I mean, objective in the sense that anyone can make a fair judgment about whether the rules are being followed or not, but somehow get the alignment back. [00:15:46] Ben: Yeah. And then, so it's like, so, so that game, that game went out of whack, but then sort of like there's. The broader metagame that is like that that's the, the point of the consistent thing. And then also sort of you, you mentioned string theory earlier, and as I was reading the book, I, I don't think you call this out explicitly, but I, I feel like there are a number of domains that people would think of as science now, but that sort of by your, by, by the iron law would not count. So, so string theory being one of them where it's like very hard, we've sort of reached the limit of observation, at least until we have better equipment. Another [00:16:35] one that came to mind was like a lot of evolutionary arguments were sort of, because it's based on something that is lot like is in the past there there's sort of no way to. To gather additional evidence. W would you say that, like, it's actually, you have a fairly strict bound on what counts as science? [00:16:59] Michael: It is, it is strict, but I think it's, it's not my, it's not in any way. My formulation, this is the way science really is now. It's okay. The point of sciences to is to develop theories and models and so on, and then to empirically test them. And a part of that activity is just developing the theories and models. And so it's completely fine for scientists to develop models and string theory and so on and, and develop evolutionary models of that runway ahead of the evidence. Yeah. I, you know, there where, where, where it's practically very difficult to come up with evidence testimony. I don't think that's exact that in itself is not [00:17:35] unscientific, but then that the question of course immediately comes up. Okay. So now what do we do with these models and, and The iron rule says there's only one, there's only one way to assess them, which is to look for evidence. So what happens when you're in a position with string theory or see with some models and evolutionary psychology in particular where, where it's there's there just is no evidence right now that there's a temptation to find other ways to advance those theories. And so the string theorists would like to argue for string theory on the ground of its it's unifying power, for example, that evolutionary psychologists, I think relying on a set of kind of intuitive appeal, or just a sense that there's something about the smile that sort of feels right. It really captures the experience of being a human being and say, I don't know, sexually jealous or something like that. And that's just not, that is not science. And that is not the sort of thing that. In general published in scientific journals, but yeah, the [00:18:35] question that's come up. Well, maybe we are being too strict. Maybe we, if we could, we would encourage the creation of more useful, interesting illuminating explanatorily powerful models and theories. If we allowed that, allowed them to get some prestige and scientific momentum in ways other than the very evidence focus way. Well, maybe it would just open the gates to a bunch of adventure, idle speculation. Yeah. That was way science down and distract scientists from doing the stuff that has actually resulted in 300 years or so of scientific progress. [00:19:12] Ben: And, and, and your argument would be that like for the ladder, that is well don't [00:19:21] Michael: rush in, I would say, you know, think carefully before you do it. [00:19:25] Ben: No, I mean, I find that that very another, another place where I felt like your framework, [00:19:35] I'm not quite sure what the right word is. Like sort of like there was, there was some friction was, is with especially with the the, the Taconic principle of needing to find like, sort of like very minute differences between what the theory would predict. And the reality is sort of areas you might call it like, like complex systems or emergent behavior and where sort of being able to explain sort of like what the fundamentally, just because you can explain how the building blocks of a system work does like, makes it very hard to make. It does not actually help you make predictions about that system. And I I'm I'm do you have a sense of that? How, how you expect that to work out in with, with the iron rule, because it's, it's like when there are, there are just like so many parameters that you could sort of like, argue like, well, like we either we predicted it or we didn't predict it. [00:20:34] Michael: Yeah, [00:20:35] no. Right. So, so sometimes the productions are so important that people will do the work necessary to really crank through the model. So where the forecast is the best example of that. So getting a weather forecast for five days time, you just spend a lot of money gathering data and running simulations on extremely expensive computers, but almost all of, almost all of science. There just isn't the funding for that. And so you'd never going to be able to make, or it's never going to be practically possible to make those kinds of predictions. But I think these models are capable of making other kinds of predictions. So I mean, even in the case of, of the weather models, you can, without, without, without being able to predict 10 days in advance, as long as you relax your demands and just want a general sense of say whether that climate is going to get warmer, you can make, do with a lot with, with, with many fewer parameters. I mean, in the case of, in a way that's not the greatest example because the climate is so complicated that to, to [00:21:35] even, to make these much less specific predictions, you still need a lot of information and computing power, but I think most, most science of complex systems hinges on hinges on relaxing the, the demands for, for. Of the specificity of the prediction while still demanding some kind of prediction or explanation. And sometimes, and sometimes what you do is you also, you say, well, nevermind prediction. Let's just give me a retrodiction and see if we can explain what actually happened, but the explanation has to be anchored and observable values of things, but we can maybe with some sort of economic incident or evolutionary models are a good example of this weekend. Once we've built the model after the fact we can dig up lots of bits and pieces that will show us that the course of say, we, we, we never could have predicted that evolutionary change would move in a certain direction, but by getting the right fossil evidence and so on, we can see it actually did [00:22:35] move in that direction and conforms to the model. But what we're often doing is we're actually getting the parameters in their model from the observation of what actually happened. So there are these, these are all ways that complex system science can be tested empirically one way or [00:22:52] Ben: another. Yeah. The, the thing that I guess that I'm, I'm sort of hung up on is if you want, like, if you relax the specificity of the predictions that you demand it makes it harder than to sort of compare to compare theories, right? So it's like w the, you have, you know, it's like Newton and Einstein were like, sort of were drastically different models of the world, but in re like the reality was that their predictions were, you need very, very specific predictions to compare between them. And so if, if the hole is in order [00:23:35] to get evidence, you need to re lacks specificity it makes it then harder to. Compare [00:23:41] Michael: theories. No, that's very true. So before you, before you demand, is that theories explain why things fall to the floor when dropped then? Good. Einstein let's go. Aristotle looks. Exactly. Yeah. And one reason physics has been able to make so much progress is that the model, all Sara, the models are simple enough that we can make these very precise predictions that distinguish among theories. The thing in that in complex systems sciences, we often, often there's a fair amount of agreement on the underlying processes. So say Newton versus Einstein. There's what you have is a difference in the fundamental picture of space and time and force and so on. But if you're doing something like economics or population ecology, so that looking at ecosystems, animals eating one another and so on. [00:24:35] That the underlying processes are in some sense, fairly uncontroversial. And the hard part is finding the right kind of model to put them together in a way that is much simpler than they're actually put together in reality, but that still captures enough of those underlying processes to make good predictions. And so I think because the prob that problem is a little bit different. You can, the, the that's, it's less, the, the situation is less a matter of distinguishing between really different fundamental theories and Mora case of refining models to see what needs to be included or what can be left out to make the right kinds of predictions. In particular situations, you still need a certain amount of specificity. Obviously, if you, if you really just say, I'm not going to care about anything about the fact that things fall downwards rather than up, then you're not going to be able to refine your models very far before you run out of. It's to give you any further guidance. That's, that's [00:25:35] very true. Yeah. But typically that complex systems kinds of models are rather more specific than that. I mean, usually they're too specific and they give you, they, they, they say something very precise that doesn't actually happen. Right. And what you're doing is you're trying to bring that, that particular prediction closer to what really happens. So that gives, and that gives you a kind of that gives you something to work towards bringing the prediction towards the reality while at the same time not demanding of the model that already make a completely accurate prediction. [00:26:10] Ben: Yeah. But that makes sense. And so sort of to like another sort of track is like what do you think about like theory free? Predictions. Right? So so like the extremity exam question would be like, could a, like very large neural net do science. Right. So, so if you had no theory at all, but [00:26:35] incredibly accurate predictions, like sort of, how does that square with, with the iron rule [00:26:41] Michael: in your mind? That's a great question. So when I formulate the iron Roy, I build the notion of explanation into it. Yeah. And I think that's functioned in, in an important way in the history of science especially in fields where explanation is actually much easier than prediction, like evolutionary modeling, as I was just saying. Now when you have, if you have the, if you, if your, if your model is an effect, then you're on that, that just makes these predictions it looks, it looks like it's not really providing you with an explanatory theory. The model is not in any way articulating, let's say the causal principles, according to which the things that's predicting actually happen. And you might think for that reason, it's not, I mean, of course this thing could always be an aid there's no, it's not it almost anything can have a place in science as a, as a, as a tool, as a stepping stone. Right. So could you cook, but quickly [00:27:35] you say, okay, we now have we now have we've now finished doing the science of economics because we've found out how to build these neural networks that predict the economy, even though we have no idea how they work. Right. I mean, I don't think so. I don't think that's really satisfying because it's not providing us with the kind of knowledge that science is working towards, but I can imagine someone saying, well, maybe that's all we're ever going to get. And what we need is a broader conception of empirical inquiry. Yeah. That doesn't put so much emphasis on an explanation. I mean, what do you want to do. To be just blindsided by the economy every single time, because you insist on a explanatory theory. Yeah. Or do you want, what do you want to actually have some ability to predict what's going to happen to make the world a better place? Well, of course they want to make the world a better place. So we've, I think we've focused on building these explanatory theories. We've put a lot of emphasis, I would say on getting explanations. Right. But, [00:28:35] but scientists have always have always played around with theories that seem to get the right answer for reasons that they don't fully comprehend. Yeah. And you know, one possible future for science or empirical inquiry more broadly speaking is that that kind of activity comes to predominate rather than just being, as I said earlier, a stepping stone on the way to truly explanatory theories. [00:29:00] Ben: It's like, I sort of think of it in terms of. Almost like compression where the thing that is great about explanatory theories is that it compresses all, it just takes all the evidence and it sort of like just reduces the dimension drastically. And so I'm just sort of like thinking through this, it's like, what would a world in which sort of like non explanatory predictions is like, is fully admissible. Then it just leads to sort of like some exponential [00:29:35] explosion of I don't know, like of whatever is doing the explaining. Right? Cause it just, there there's never a compression. From the evidence down to a theory, [00:29:47] Michael: although it may be with these very complicated systems that even in an explanatory model is incredibly uncompressed. Yeah, exactly. Inflated. So we just have to, I mean, I think it's, it's kind of amazing. This is one of my other interests is the degree to which it's possible to build simple models of complicated systems and still get something out of them, not precise predictions about, about, about what's going to happen to particular components in the system. You know, whether, whether this particular rabbit is going to get eaten yeah. Tomorrow or the next day, but, but more general models about how say increasing the number of predators will have certain effects on the dynamics of the system or, or you know, how the kinds of the kinds of things that population ecologists do do with these models is, is, is answer questions. So this is a bit of an example of what I was saying earlier [00:30:35] about making predictions that are real predictions, but but a bit more qualitative, you know, will. Well one of the very first uses of these models was to answer the question of whether just generally killing a lot of the animals in an ecosystem will lead the the prey populations to increase relatively speaking or decrease. It turns out, but in general they increase. So I think this was after this was in the wake of world war one in Italy George, during world war one, there was less fishing because it's just a sailor, but we're also Naval warfare, I guess, not, maybe not so much in the Mediterranean, but in any case there was, there were, there was less fishing. So it was sort of the opposite of, of killing off a lot of animals in the ecosystem. And the idea was to explain why it was that certain just patterns and that increase in decrease in the populations of predator and prey were served. So some of the first population ecology models were developed to predict. So it's kind of a, and these are tiny. These, this [00:31:35] is, I mean, here you are modeling this ocean. That's full of many, many different species of fish. And yet you just have a few differential equations. I mean, that look complicated, but the amount of compression is unbelievable. And the fact that you get anything sensible out of it at all is truly amazing. So we've kind of been lucky so far. Maybe we've just been picking the low-hanging fruit. But there's a lot of that fruit to be had eventually though, maybe we're just going to have to, and, you know, thankfully there're supercomputers do science that way. Yeah. [00:32:06] Ben: Or, or, or developed sort of a, an entirely different way of attacking those kinds of systems. I feel like sort of our science has been very good at going after compressible systems or I'm not even sure how to describe it. That I feel like we're, we're starting to run into all of these different systems that don't, that sort of aren't as amenable [00:32:35] to to, to Titanic sort of like going down to really more and more detail. And so I, I I'd always speculate whether it's like, we actually need like new sort of like, like philosophical machinery to just sort of like grapple with that. Yeah. [00:32:51] Michael: When you modeling, I mean, festival, they might be new modeling machinery and new kinds of mathematics that make it possible to compress things that were previously incompressible, but it may just be, I mean, we look at you look at a complicated system, like the, like in an ecosystem or the weather or something like that. And you can see that small, small differences and the way things start out can have big effects down the line. So. What seems to happen in these cases where we can have a lot of compression as that, those, although those small, those there's various effects of small, small variations and initial conditions kind of cancel out. Yeah. So it may be, you change things [00:33:35] around and it's different fish being eaten, but still the overall number of each species being eaten is about the same, you know, it kind of all evens out in the end and that's what makes the compression possible. But if that's not the case, if, if these small changes make differences to the kinds of things we're trying to predict people, of course often associate this with the metaphor of the butterfly effect. Then I dunno if compression is even possible. You simply, well, if you really want to predict whether, whether there's going to be an increase in inflation in a year's time or a decrease in inflation, and that really every person that really does hinge on the buying decisions of. Some single parent, somewhere in Ohio, then, then you just need to F to, to figure out what the buying decisions of every single person in that in the economy are in and build them in. And yet at the same time, it doesn't, it, it seems that everyone loves the butterfly effect. [00:34:35] And yet the idea that the rate of inflation is going to depend on this decision by somebody walking down the aisles of a supermarket in higher, that just doesn't seem right. It does seem that things kind of cancel out that these small effects mostly just get drowned out or they, they kind of shift things around without changing their high-level qualitative patents. Yeah. Well, [00:34:56] Ben: I mean, this is the diversion, but I feel like that that sort of like touches right on, like, do you believe in, in like the forces theory of history, more like the great man theory of history, right? And then it's like, and people make arguments both ways. And so I think that. And we just haven't haven't figured that out. Actually split like the speaking of, of, of great man theory of history. The thing, like an amazing thing about your book is that you, you sort of, I feel like it's very humanistic in the sense of like, oh, scientists are people like they do like lots of things. They're [00:35:35] not just like science machines. And you have this, like this beautiful analogy of a coral reef that you, that, that scientists you know, contribute, like they're, they're, they're like the living polyps and they build up these they're, they're sort of like artifacts of work and then they go away and it, they, the new scientists continue to build on that. And I was sort of wondering, like, do you see that being at odds with the fact that there's so much tacit knowledge. In science in the sense that like you F for most fields, I found you probably could not reconstruct them based only on the papers, right? Like you have to talk to the people who have done the experiments. Do you see any tension [00:36:23] Michael: there? Well, it's true that the, the metaphor of the coral reef doesn't doesn't capture that aspect of science. It's very true. So I think on the one hand that what's what is captured by the metaphor is the idea that the, [00:36:35] the, what science leaves behind in terms of, of evidence that can is, is, is interpreted a new every generation. So each new generation of scientists comes along and, and, and, and sort of looks at the accumulated fact. I mean, this is going to sound it, this is, this makes it sound. This sounds a little bit fanciful, but you know, in some sense, that's, what's going on, looks at the facts and says, well, okay, how shall I, what are these really telling me? Yeah. And they bring their own kind of human preconceptions or biases. Yeah. But none of these break-ins the preconceptions and biases are not necessarily bad things. Yeah. They look at it in the light of their own mind and they are reinterpret things. And so the scientific literature is always just to kind of a starting point for this thought, which, which really changes from generation to generation. On the other hand, at the same time, as you just pointed out, scientists are being handed certain kinds of knowledge, [00:37:35] which, which are not for them to create a new, but rather just to kind of learn how to just have a use various instruments, how to use various statistical techniques actually. And so there's this continuity to the knowledge let's, as I say, not captured at all by the reef metaphor, both of those things are going, are going on. There's the research culture, which well, maybe one way to put it. It's the culture, both changes stays the same, and it's important that it stays the same in the sense that people retain their, know how they have for using these instruments until eventually the instrument becomes obsolete and then the culture is completely lost, but it's okay. Most of the time if it's completely lost. But on the other hand, there is this kind of always this fresh new re-interpretation of the, of the evidence simply because the the interpretation of evidence is is a rather subjective business. And what the preceding generations are handing on is, is not, is, should be seen more as a, kind of [00:38:35] a data trove than, as, than a kind of a body of established knowledge. But [00:38:43] Ben: then I think. Question is, is it's like, if, what counts as evidence changes and all you are getting is this data trove of things that people previously thought counted as evidence, right? Like, so you know, it's like, they all, all the things that were like, like thrown out and not included in the paper doesn't like that make it sort of harder to reinterpret it. [00:39:12] Michael: Well, there's, I mean, yeah. The standards for counselors, evidence, I think of as being unchanging and that's an important part of the story here. So it's being passed on, it's supposed to be evidence now of course, some of it, some of it will turn out to be the result of faulty measurements, all these suspicious, some of that even outright fraud, perhaps. And so, and so. To some extent, that's [00:39:35] why you wouldn't want to just kind of take it for granted and they get that, that side of things is not really captured by the reef metaphor either. Yeah. But I think that the important thing that is captured by the metaphor is this idea that the, what, what's the thing that really is the heritage of science in terms of theory and evidence, is that evidence itself? Yeah. It's not so much a body of knowledge, although, you know, that knowledge can, it's not that it's, it's not, it's not that everyone has to start from scratch every generation, but it's, it's this incredibly valuable information which may be, you know, maybe a little bit complicated in some corners. That's true, but still it's been generated according to the same rules that or, you know, 10 to. by the same rules that we're trying to satisfy today. Yeah. And so, which is just as [00:40:35] trustworthy or untrustworthy as the evidence we're getting today. And there it is just recorded in the animals of science. [00:40:41] Ben: So it's much more like the, the thing that's important is the, like the, the process and the filtering mechanism, then the, the, the specific artifacts that yeah. [00:40:55] Michael: Come out, I'll make me part of what I'm getting at with that metaphor is the scientists have scientists produce the evidence. They have their, an interpretation of that evidence, but then they retire. They die. And that interpretation is not really, it doesn't need to be important anymore enough and isn't important anymore. Of course, they may persuade some of their graduate students to go along with their interpretation. They may be very politically powerful in their interpretation, may last for a few generations, but typically ultimately that influence wanes and What really matters is, is, is the data trove. Yeah. I mean, we still, it's not, as you, as you said, it's not perfect. We have to regard it with that [00:41:35] somewhat skeptical eye, but not too skeptical. And that's the, that's the, the real treasure house yeah. Of [00:41:43] Ben: science and something that I was, I was wondering, it's like, you, you make this, this really, you have a sentence that you described, you say a non event such as sciences non-rival happens, so to speak almost everywhere. And I would add, like, it happens almost everywhere all the time, and this is, this is wildly speculative. But do you think that there would have been any way to like, to predict that science would happen or to like no. There was something missing. So like, could, could we then now, like, would there be a way to say like, oh, we're like, we're missing something crucial. If that makes sense, like, could we, could we look at the fact that [00:42:35] science consistently failed to arrive and ask, like, is there, is there something else like some other kind of like like intellectual machinery that also that has not arrived. Did you think, like, is it possible to look for that? [00:42:51] Michael: Oh, you mean [00:42:52] Ben: now? Yeah. Or like, like, or could someone have predicted science in the past? Like in [00:42:57] Michael: the past? I, I mean, okay. I mean, clearly there were a lot of things, highly motivated inside. Why is thinkers. Yeah. Who I assume I'd have loved to sell the question of say configuration of the solar system, you have that with these various models floating around for thousands of years. I'm not sure everyone knows this, but, but, but, but by, you know, by the time of the Roman empire, say that the model with the sun at the center was well known. The muddle with the earth at the central is of course well known and the model where the earth is at the center, but then the [00:43:35] sun rotates around the earth and the inner planets rotate around the sun was also well known. And in fact was actually that this always surprises me was if anything, that predominant model in the early middle ages and in Western Europe, it had been kind of received from late antiquity from that, from the writers at the end of the Roman empire. And that was thought to be the, the kind of the going story. Yeah. It's a complicated of course, that there are many historical complications, but I, I take it that someone like Aristotle would have loved to have really settled that question and figured it out for good. He had his own ideas. Of course, he thought the earth had to be at the center because of its that fit with his theory of gravity, for example, and made it work and having the Senate, the city just wouldn't wouldn't have worked. And for various other reasons. So it would have been great to have invented this technique for actually generating evidence that that in time would be seen by everyone has decisively in favor of one of these theories, the others. So they must have really wanted it. [00:44:35] Did they think, did they themselves think that something was missing or did they think they had what they needed? I think maybe Aristotle thought he had what was needed. He had the kind of philosophical arguments based on establishing kind of coherence between his many amazing theories of different phenomena. Know his. Falling bodies is a story about that. The solar system, as of course, he would not have called it the, the planets and so on, and it all fit together so well. And it was so much better than anything anyone else came up with. He may have thought, this is how you establish the truth of, of of the geocentric system with the earth at the center. So now I don't need anything like science and there doesn't need to be anything like science, and I'm not even thinking about the possibility of something like science. Yeah. And that, to some extent, that explains why someone like Aristotle, who seemed to be capable of having almost any idea that could be had, nevertheless did [00:45:35] not seem to have, sort of see a gap to see the need, for example, for precise, qualitative experiments or, or, or even the point of doing them. Yeah. It's, you know, that's the best, I think that's the most I can say. That I don't, I let myself looking back in history, see that people felt there was a gap. And yet at the same time, they were very much aware that these questions were not being said, or [00:46:04] Ben: it was just it just makes me wonder w w some, some period in the future, we will look back at us and say like, oh, that thing, right. Like, I don't know, whatever, like, Mayans, right? Like how could you not have figured out the, like my antigenic method? And it's just it, I, I just find it thought provoking to think, like, you know, it's like, how do you see your blind spots? [00:46:32] Michael: Yeah. Well, yeah, I'm a philosopher. And we in, in [00:46:35] philosophy, it's still, it's still much like it was with Aristotle. We have all these conflicting theories of say you know, justice. What, what really makes the society just to what makes an act. Or even what makes one thing cause of another thing. And we don't really, we don't know how to resolve those disputes in a way that will establish any kind of consensus. We also feel very pleased with ourselves as I take it. Aristotle's are these really great arguments for the views? We believe in me, that's still sort of quite more optimistic maybe than, than we ought to be. That we'll be able to convince everyone else. We're right. In fact, what we really need and philosophers, do you have this thought from time to time? There's some new way of distinguishing between philosophical theories. This was one of the great movements of early 20th century philosophy. That logical positivism was one way. You can look at it as an attempt to build a methodology where it would be possible to use. [00:47:35] And in effect scientific techniques to determine what to, to adjudicate among philosophical theories, mainly by throwing away most of the theories as meaningless and insufficiently connected to empirical facts. So it was a, it was a brutal, brutal method, but it was an idea. The idea was that we could have, there was a new method to be had that would do for philosophy. What, what science did for, you know, natural philosophy for physics and biology and so on. That's an intriguing thought. Maybe that's what I should be spending my time thinking about, please. [00:48:12] Ben: I, I do want to be respectful of your time, the like 1, 1, 1 last thing I'd love to ask about is like, do you think that and, and you, you talked about this a bit in the book, is that, do you think that the way that we communicate science has become almost too sterile. And sort of one of my, my going concerns [00:48:35] is this the way in which everybody has become like super, super specialized. And so, and sort of like once the debate is settled, creating the very sterile artifacts is, is, is useful and powerful. But then as, as, as you pointed out as like a ma as a mechanism of like, actually sort of like communicating knowledge, they're not necessarily the best. But, but like, because we've sort of held up these like sterile papers as the most important thing it's made it hard for people in one specialization to actually like, understand what's going on in another. So do you think that. That, that, that we've sort of like Uber sterilized it. You know, it's like, we talked earlier about people who want to, to change the rules and I'm very much with you on like, we should be skeptical about that. But then at the same time you see that this is going [00:49:35] on. [00:49:35] Michael: Yeah. Well, I think, I mean, there's a real problem here, regardless, you know, whatever the rules of the problem of communicating something as complicated as scientific knowledge or the really, I should say the state of scientific play because often what needs to be communicated is not just somebody that's now been established beyond any doubt, but here's what people are doing right now. Here's the kind of research they're doing here are the kinds of obstacles they're running into to communicate, to, to put that in a form where somebody can just come along and digest it all easily. I think it was incredibly difficult, no matter what the rules are. Yeah. It's probably not the best use of most scientists time and to try to present their work in that way. It's better for them just to go to the rock face and start chipping away at their and little local area. So what, what you need is either for a scientist to take time out from time to time. And I mean there exists these publications review [00:50:35] publications, which try to do this job. That's true. So that people in related fields, you know, typically in the typically related fields means PhD in the same subjects. They're usually for the nearest neighbors to see what's going on, but often they're written in ways that are pretty accessible. I find. So then you create, you create a publication that simply has a different set of rules. The point here is not to in any way to evaluate the evidence, but simply to give a sense of the state of play for. To reach further a field, you have science journalists or what's going on with newspapers and magazines right now is because it's not very good for serious science journalism. And then you have scientists and people like me, who, for whatever reason, take some time out from what they usually do to really, really look kind of a self-standing project to explain what's going on those activities all to some extent, take place outside the narrow narrow view of the [00:51:35] iron rule. So, and I think, I think it's, it's going okay. Given the difficulty of the task. It seems to me that that the, the, the knowledge of the information is being communicated in a, in a somewhat effective, accessible way. I mean, not that if anything, the real, the real, the real barriers to. Some kinds of fruitful, interdisciplinary thinking, not just that it's hard for one mind to simply take on all this stuff that needs to be taken on no matter how effectively, even brilliantly it's communicated the world is just this very complicated place. Yeah. You know, one, one thing I'm interested in historically not, I mean, just, I find fascinating is that fruitfulness of certain kinds of research programs that came out of came out of finding serious wars, like in particular, the second world war, you threw a bunch of people together and they had to solve some problem, like [00:52:35] building at a bomb , it's usually something, something horrendous or a a device, the device for the guns and bombers and so on that would allow that. To rather than having to bit very skillfully. I forget the word for it. You know, you kind of have to put your guide ahead of where the enemy fighter so by the time that your, your, your bullets get there, the plane arrives at the same time, but they built these really sophisticated analog computers basically would do the job. So the Ghana, some, you know, some 19 year olds, like just pointed the plane again. Yeah. And a lot of problems to do with logistics and weather forecasting. And so on this, these, these, the need to have that done through together, people from very different areas in engineering and science and so on and resulted in this amazing explosion. I think if knowledge [00:53:35] it's a very, it's a very attractive period in the history of human thought. When you go back and look at some of the things people were writing in the late forties and fifties, Computers, how the mind works. And so on. And I think some of that is coming out from this, this kind of almost scrambling process that that happened when, when these very specific kind of military engineering problems are solved by throwing people together who never normally would have talked to one another. Maybe we need a little bit of that. Not the war. Yeah. But [00:54:08] Ben: I have a friend who described this as a serious context of use is it is a thing. And it's, I, I mean, I'm, I'm incredibly biased towards looking at that period. Okay. But [00:54:20] Michael: I guess it's connected to what you're doing. [00:54:23] Ben: Absolutely. Is I do you know who. Yeah. So, so he actually wrote a series of memoirs and I just there reprinting it. I wrote the forward to it. So that's, [00:54:35] so I'm like, I agree with you very strongly. And it is it's. I find, I always find that fascinating because I feel like there's, there's like this. I mean, there's this paradigm that sort of got implemented after world war II, where do you think like, oh, like theory leads to applied science leads to leads to technology, but you actually see all these, these places where like, trying to do a thing makes you realize a new theory. Right. And you see similar thing with like like, like the steam engine, right? Like that's how we get thermodynamics is it's like what, like that's a great piece of work that's right, right. Yeah. So that's, I mean, like that, that absolutely plays to my biases that like, yeah, we. Like not, not doing interdisciplinary things for their own sake. Like just being like, no, like let's get these people that are rude, but like having very serious contexts of use that can like drive people having [00:55:32] Michael: problem to solve. It's not just the case [00:55:35] of kind of enjoying kind of chatting about what you each do. And then just going back to the thing you were doing before. Yeah. Feeling, feeling enriched. Yeah. But otherwise I'm changed it. It's interesting [00:55:46] Ben: though, because the incentives in that situation sort of like now fall outside of the iron rule right. Where it's like, it's like, you don't care. Like you don't care about like, I mean, I guess to some extent you could argue like the thing needs to work. And so if it works, that is evidence that your, your theory is, is [00:56:09] Michael: correct. That's true. But, you know, but I think as you're about to say, engineering is not science and it's not it's the own rule is not overseeing engineering. It's the it's engineering is about making things that work and then about producing evidence for, or against various ideas. That's just a kind of a side effect, [00:56:27] Ben: but then it can sort of like, I guess it can like spark those ideas that people then sort of like take, I [00:56:35] was like, I mean, in my head, it's all of this, like I think of what would I call like phenomena based cycles where like, there's, there's like this big, like cyclical movement where like you discover this like phenomena and then you like, can theorize it and you use that theory to then do like, I dunno, like build better microscopes, which then let you make new observations, which let you discover new phenomena. [00:57:00] Michael: It's really difficult to tell where things are going. Yeah. I think the discovery of plate tectonics is another good example of this sea, of these, all of these scientists doing things that, that certainly not looking into the possible mechanisms for continental drift, right. But instead, getting interested for their own personal reasons and doing things that don't sound very exciting, like measuring the magnet, the measuring the ways that the orientation of the magnetic field has changed over past history. By looking at the, by basically digging up bits of rock and tests, looking at the orientations of the, [00:57:35] of the iron molecules or whatever, and the lock and, you know, it's, I mean, it's not, it's not completely uninteresting, but in itself it sounds like a kind of respectable, but probably fairly dull sideline and geology. And then things like that. We're developing the ability to meet very precise measurements of the gravitational field. Those things turn out to be. Key to understanding this, this amazing fact about the way the whole planet works. Yeah. But nobody could have understood in advance that, that they would play that role. What you needed was for a whole bunch of, that's not exactly chaos, but I kind of I kind of diversity that might look almost, it might look rather wasteful. Yeah. That's very practical perspective to, to blossom. Yeah. This is, [00:58:29] Ben: I, I truly do think that like, moving forward knowledge involves like being almost like [00:58:35] irresponsible, right? Like if you had to make a decision, it's like, it's like, should we fund these people who are going in like measuring magnetic fields just for, for funsies. Right. And it's like, like, like from, from like a purely rational standpoint, it's like, no, but yeah, [00:58:51] Michael: the reason that sort of thing happens is cause a bunch of people decide they're interested in. Yeah, persuade the students to do it too. And you know, whether they could explain it to the rest of the world, actually that's another, there was also a military angle on that. I don't know if you know that, but the, the, some of the mapping of the ocean floors that was also crucial to the discovery of plate tectonics in the fifties and sixties was done by people during the war with the first sonar systems who nobody's supposed to be, you know, finding submarines or whatever, but decided, Hey, it would be kind of interesting just to turn the thing on and leave it on and sort of see what's down there. Yeah. And that's what they did. And that's how some of those first maps started being put together. [00:59:35] That's [00:59:36] Ben: actually one of the, one of my concerns about trying to do science with, with like no networks is. How many times do you see someone just go like, huh, that's funny. And like, like so far you can't like computers. Like they can sort of like find what they're setting out to find or like they have a, or they, they almost have like a very narrow window of what is considered to evidence. And perhaps like through, through your framework the, the thought of like, huh, that's funny is like you're someone's brain, all of a sudden, like take something as evidence that wasn't normally like supposed to be evidence. Right. So it's like, you're doing like one set of experiments and then you just like, notice this like completely different thing. Right. And you're like, oh, like maybe that's actually like a different piece of evidence for something completely different. And then it opens up a rabbit hole. [01:00:31] Michael: Yeah. This is another one of those cases though, with.[01:00:35] Sort of the, some kind of creative cause it, and they do think it's incredibly important that scientists not get distracted by things like this. On the other hand, it would be terrible if scientists never got distracted by things like this. And I guess I, one thing I see with the iron rule is it's is it's a kind of a social device for making scientists less distracted. Well, not putting the kind of mental fetters on that would, would make it impossible for them ever to become distracted. [01:01:05] Ben: And maybe perhaps like the, like the, the distraction and like saying, oh, that's funny. It's like the natural state of human affairs. [01:01:12] Michael: Well, I think so. I think if we, we would all be like Aristotle and it turns out it was better for science fair, actually a little bit less curious and yeah. And it's interesting and variable and we had actually our, so [01:01:24] Ben: one could almost say that like the, the iron rule, like w w would you say it's accurate that like the iron rule is absolutely. But so [01:01:35] is breaking in the sense that like, like if, if like somehow there, like you could enforce that, like every single person only obeyed it all the time science, like we, we actually, we make serendipitous discoveries. And so it's like in order to make those, you need to break the rule, but you can't have everybody running around, breaking the rule all the [01:01:57] Michael: time. All right. Put it a little bit differently. Cause I see the rule list is not so much, it's not so much a rural for life. And for thinking is for, for sort of publishing activity. So you don't, you're not, you're not technically breaking the rule when you think. Huh? That's funny. And you go off and start thinking your thoughts. You may not be moving towards. Yeah. It has the kind of scientific publication that, that satisfies the role. But nor are you breaking. The F, but if all scientists can, as it were live to the iron rule, not just in there, not just when they took themselves to be playing a game in every way that they thought about [01:02:35] they, they, they thought about the, the point of their lives as, as kind of investigators of nature. Then, I mean, that's, people are just not like that. It's hard to imagine that you could really, that would ever really happen. Although, you know, to some extent, I think our science education system does encourage it. Yeah. But if that really happened, that would probably be disastrous. We need, it's like the pinch of salt, you know, if you only want to pinch, but without it, it's not good. Yeah. That [01:03:06] Ben: seems like an excellent place to end. Thank you so much for being part of idea missions. [01:03:35]

Tj, Ben, and Brendan invite the one and only, Joe Decadence to the show to review Taconic Double Barrel Maple Finished Bourbon. They rate it on nose, taste, finish, cohesiveness/complexity, and value!

Today we take a moment to sip on and review some newer whiskies to our market. Starting off with Eau Claire Single Malt Batch 005, then moving on to Taconic Cabernet Cask Bourbon, Blue Run 14 year Bourbon and finally finishing off with Raasay's inaugural first batch of their Single Malt. Download and listen in to hear all about them! 

This week Ben and Frane blasted out a crazy week of NFL news from an outdoor location, where football should be played and football podcasts should be recorded! We discuss the NFL week 12 games, hash out the week 13 matchups and break down the betting lines! We discuss the Steelers getting embarrassed by the Bengals, Dolphins spoil Cam Newton's day, Eagles fall to the Giants, Patriots roll the Titans, Buccaneers comeback against the Colts, Jets beat the Texans, Broncos unplug the Chargers, 49ers blast the Vikings, Packers slam the Rams, Ravens win ugly against Browns, Seahawks blow it against Washington, Cowboys beat undermanned Saints, and much more.Frane concocted the shot of the week. We tasted and reviewed Taconic Distillery Maple Bourbon and Bell's Brewery Lager.Ben and Frane tell our fans their worst and most frustrating moment of NFL week 12.Follow us at @GoalThirst on Twitter and @thirstand on Instagram. You can listen and subscribe at thirstandgoal.buzzsprout.com. Please also check us out on Pandora and Amazon Music! To send us a question or comment, email: podcastthirstandgoal@gmail.com. Leave us a voicemail at (818) 350-2680 (Be aware: we may play it on the air). 

The guys are back again to put this year's Midwinter Night's Dram up against Taconic Double Barrel Bourbon Maple Finish. Check it out and leave us a comment with what you're drinking!

Courses for Fall 2021 Click Here for a printable version Fall Term is now open for Registration. Classes start September 13th. PLEASE NOTE: For the safety of our instructors and students, all fall-term classes will be held on Zoom. TLC is a non-profit membership organization providing the opportunity for lifelong learning to residents of the Northwest Corner of Connecticut and adjacent communities in New York and Massachusetts. TLC's courses cover a wide variety of academic subjects taught by volunteers, all experts in their fields. Click on Course Listings on the left to see what courses we offer. Annual membership dues of $60 per person are fully tax-deductible. There are no other set fees. Individuals may sign up for any number of courses. Classes lasting two hours are held once a week at one of our three conveniently located venues. Attendees are free to come and go as they like; there are no exams. Those taking advantage of TLC's program will rekindle the excitement of learning, expand their horizons, be able to share their knowledge, have fun and make new friends. TLC is a wonderful way to stay involved and well informed. Join today! For more information, click on an item on the left, or contact us by mail or by phone. Taconic Learning Center, Inc. PO BOX 1752, Lakeville, CT 06039 Tel. 860-364-9363 Click Here to go to online Registration, or to print course descriptions, or Registration form

On this Whiskey Quickie by Bourbon Pursuit, we review Taconic Mizunara Cask Bourbon. This non-age stated bourbon is 107 proof and $90 MSRP. Let us know what you think. Cheers! Whiskey Quickie is brought to you by Barrell Bourbon. Learn more at BarrellBourbon.com. DISCLAIMER: The whiskey in this review was provided to us at no cost. We were not compensated by the spirit producer for this review. This is our honest opinion based on what we tasted. Please drink responsibly.

Hi Whiskey Ringers, it is episode 7! Thank you so much for listening and please share with your friends, family, and fellow whiskey lovers.  On this episode, I've got Paul Coughlin, founder of Taconic Distillery in New York's Hudson Valley. New York whiskey - bourbon, rye, single malts - is fascinating and deeply personal to me. I love talking to friends and distillers throughout New York about different styles, the history of distilling in New York, and what makes New York unique in the distilling landscape. Of course, the first thing that comes to mind is Empire Rye, a non-legal set of standards for New York rye, but that'll be talked about on a future episode.  Taconic is probably my favorite New York-based distillery. There might be a product here and there from another place that I like more, but I don't think another New York distillery has the consistency of product that Taconic has. There's also no other distillery in New York from which I enjoy nearly every product they make. Are you a New York distillery listening to this and thinking “hey, we've got some great stuff, have you tried us?” I'll be honest, the answer is probably no. And that's on me, but hey, we're only on episode 7! If you do want me to try your products, just shoot me an email: David@whiskeyinmyweddingring.com, or reach out to me on Facebook, instagram, or through the website.  Lastly, this will be a slightly shorter episode - I promise, I'll be visiting Taconic in person to talk to the full team and get more info out of Brandon and Paul hopefully over the summer. If you haven't yet, please follow Whiskey in my Wedding Ring and the Whiskey Ring Podcast on Instagram and Facebook and subscribe to the newsletter on whiskeyinmyweddingring.com.  If you like what you hear, please consider supporting the site and the podcast. You can help out for as little as $2.50 a month at www.patreon.com/whiskeyinmyweddingring. Thank you also to our sponsors, Mash and Grape and Cairn Craft.  You can find Taconic online and on Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe to the Whiskey Ring Podcast on your favorite podcast platform today! We're on Podbean, Spotify, Stitcher, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and most other major podcast platforms. Every subscription and listen helps us get sponsors, secure guests, and ultimately get more content to you. Thank you for listening and for supporting, and please enjoy this episode with Paul Coughlin of Taconic Distillery.  Cheers! David

Paul Coughlin Interview: Taconic Distillery's Founder Chats Passion for Whiskey, Origin Story of the Company, Cocktails & The Great Outdoors The Birdies & Bourbon team had a blast chatting with Taconic Distillery's Founder, Paul Coughlin. This family run distillery is producing some wonderful whiskey expressions and bourbon barrel aged maple syrup. Taconic Distillery has some developed some outstanding spirits within their lineup of offerings. On the show we sample their Dutchess Private Reserve Straight Bourbon Whiskey which was outstanding and very unique to their New York roots. The Double Barrel Maple Bourbon Syrup is a perfect way to start you mornings. Grab some Taconic Distillery, sip along and listen/watch. Be sure to check out Taconic Distillery online at https://www.taconicdistillery.com/home or via the links on their website to the Social pages. The Neat Glass. Be sure to check out The Neat Glass online at theneatglass.com or on Instagram @theneatglass for an improved experience and use discount code: bb10 to receive your Birdies & Bourbon discount. Thank you for taking the time listen to the Birdies & Bourbon Show for all things PGA Tour, golf, gear, bourbon and mixology. Dan & Cal aim to bring you entertaining and informative episodes weekly. Please help spread the word on the podcast and tell a friend about the show. You can also help by leaving an 5-Star iTunes review. We love to hear the feedback and support! Cheers. Follow on Twitter & Instagram (@birdies_bourbon)

In this episode of Why Whiskey we are talking about the infamous Union General who contributed to the definition of "Total War" and helped bring an end to the Civil War through means that are seen to be barbaric. Come join me as I sip whiskey and share stories about this incredible military leader. https://archive.org/details/governarmies00unitrich/page/4/mode/2up http://civilwar-sherman.blogspot.com/ https://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/19530 https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Whywhiskey https://www.historynet.com/general-william-tecumseh-sherman https://archive.org/details/whitetecumsehbio00hirs/page/20/mode/2up https://www.loc.gov/resource/rbpe.2040610a/?st=text https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/Lieber_Collection/pdf/Instructions-gov-armies.pdf?loclr=bloglawhttps://www.loc.gov/exhibits/civil-war-in-america/biographies/william-t-sherman.html --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/why-whiskey/support

NOTE: Spring Term is open for Registration! TLC is a non-profit membership organization providing the opportunity for lifelong learning to residents of the Northwest Corner of Connecticut and adjacent communities in New York and Massachusetts. TLC’s courses cover a wide... Read More ›

Steve and Justine sample the new bourbon cream from Taconic Distillery. TBD music is by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com). Important Links: ABV Network Shop: https://shop.abvnetwork.com/ Our Club: https://www.abvnetwork.com/club Challenge Coin Challenges: https://www.abvnetwork.com/coin Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theabvnetwork Check us out at: abvnetwork.com. Join the revolution by adding #ABVNetworkCrew to your profile on social media.

Taconic Distillery sent us this amazing bottle of Bourbon Cream for us to review for our podcast. This bourbon cream is unlike any other, with prominent notes of Vanilla Bean and a very slight hint of whiskey. This would be great in your morning coffee (weekend or holiday, obviously), or after dinner night cap, or EVEN over your ice cream?! Yeah, we know. As always, please subscribe to our YouTube Channel, it really helps us grow as a podcast which in turn helps the businesses we promote! Leave a like comment, and subscribe. New videos every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Join Nick and Jason as they chat with the Master Distiller from Taconic Distillery.  We hope you enjoy this conversation!