A new challenge has arisen. Sides are established. Where do you fall?
Should leap seconds be kept, or should they be eliminated?
No consensus could be reached at a conference discussing the matter last week, so the leap second enjoyed a stay to continue until next time, with a UN panel of experts charged to make recommendations by no later than 2015.
On one side, you have those anal retentive people who want the leap second added to keep it synchronized to the earth's seasonal rotations. They have no title to their group so I'll call them the Pro-Leapers.
The other side, led by the United States, opposes the leap adjustment. It would mess up their computer and the many split second calculations already existing. Note that they say that it 'might mess them up.'
Britain, our stalwart ally in so many matters, have taken up the enemy's banner in this regard, claiming that to not continue making the leap second adjustment could cause even bigger problems.
A study panel has been working on this for ten years but have not reached any conclusions. The last leap second was in 2008. The next one will be in June of this year. I cannot believe that this so called scientific agency can be so divided, so clueless, and yet willing to act without knowing exactly what happened the last time a leap second was added, and what might happen this next time.
And the way they're going about this, meeting in secret. Where are their deliberations? There's something sinister going on when a scientific study goes on for ten years without reaching a conclusion. More importantly, where do our political leaders stand on this matter? Are they Pro-Leap or Against Seconds?
I can't believe that such an important matter has been buried in the New York Times. A decision needs to be reached. The seconds are counting down.
Causes Michael Seidel Supports
Kiva, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, Propublica.org, Doctors Without Borders, GreaterGood.com