.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
This one is for those of us who read Swords & Sorcery (fantasy) novels.
I recently wondered where the "prophecy" in so many of these books came from. So, I decided to find out. Here's what I learned:
The quill scritched across the parchment leaving a trail of ink in its path.
“I don’t see why you have to write it down.”
“Yeah, well I don’t really, but it helps me to better organize my thoughts, yanno?”
“I mean, it’s not like you’re not omniscient or anything like that. You’d think perfect recall would be enough.”
“True, true, but I also like doing it. It makes me feel more, eh, connected somehow. I know they’re gonna write it down too. So when I write it down, well, nevermind.”
“Connected? Ew. Just knowing they exist is bad enough. Why on us do you want to get closer to them, I do not know. I still say it was a mistake in the first place. Get rid of it.”
“It amuses me. You have yours, I have mine.”
The quill scratched. Several pages were already haphazardly piled on the corner of the desk. The feather never reached out to touch the well, but the level dropped imperceptibly with each line laid down.
A smirk scorched across the room.
“How’s this sound?
‘The light shall fall
‘Darkness will rise
‘But within the wall
‘Rests the key to conquest.’”
“Yes. Quite brilliant. Such a prophecy that will last throughout the ages and inspire great deeds of valor, heroes will sacrifice themselves and villains will have villainous plots, all trying to find out exactly what ‘the wall’ is.”
A sheet of clean parchment curled, blackened, turned to ashes and vanished.
“I have to keep it simple. Every time I send the message to them, they screw it up. They misunderstand, don’t hear me correctly, write it down wrong, think it needs ‘editing’ and in general make it a void lot more obfuscatory than it ever needed to be. Why in the null they have to bugger it up so much…”
The quill continued to leave its fast-drying footprint. A few lines before the end of the sheet, it stopped. It went back in the inkwell. The stack of parchments and the last sheet wavered and vanished.
“And another one done. Now, let’s see how long they take to unravel this one.”
A gentle smile, accompanied by a lightly shaking head, and two settled to watch the most recent prophecy of the eternal battle in side one v. side two be played out in one tiny corner of the multiverse.
"You take far to much enjoyment from this."
"It's what I do."
The views in this blog are not those of people who can't think for themselves and rely on others to think for them. For that matter, the views expressed here may not be those of people who CAN think for themselves, but it comes extremely close.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Abominable Care made sim - No. It can't be simple
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I warn you now, I am wrong. So are you because I can find a plethora of experts who can prove you and I are wrong. I can also find other experts to prove they are wrong.
So, just to see what it would be, logged into a few different sites where you can supposedly get what Abominablecare will cost you.
Depending on the site you visit and whom you believe, my annual insurance cost is $0 to $400+ per month. This depends on the insurance company, the website, how many live sacrifices I made at the last full moon, the bribes I have accepted, the plan I choose, the metallic level of coverage (lead is not an option nor is aluminum) whether or not the website admin had sex last night and a great number of other completely irrelevant factors.
If you can get in, here's the Georgia version of the ACA.
Here's what one site promises:
According to all the sites I have found, I am also eligible for a "subsidy" of about $1500, as best I remember. This is how my cost of $0 to $450 a month is computed.
I am also required, under law, to get insurance or I am fined.
So. With this information, here's my take on this plan:
I am required under the law to take money I have not earned from people I do not know and will never meet.
If I do not take this money, then this same law penalizes me.
This is forced robbery. Either I take from people whether they are willing to give or not or that same item is taken from me against my will.
Forced robbery.
I am also told this "subsidy" is in the form of a tax credit.
Ah.
If I understand this, which I don't, this means I still have to pay the monthly premiums, which I cannot afford. Then, once a year, I get to deduct the cost of the insurance from my income. This lowers the amount of taxes I have to pay.
It is not a 1:1.
For every dollar I pay, if I did, in health insurance, I wind up getting less than 30 cents back in my refund.
The alternative is to get back less in my tax refund. With the fine at 1 percent of my taxable income, the drop in my refund is insignificant to what I have to pay in premiums.
If this math is correct it is far cheaper for me to not get insurance.
Except, I am of course wrong as a lot of people have already told me. Each has a different explanation of why I am wrong, all the others are wrong and why they are correct.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I warn you now, I am wrong. So are you because I can find a plethora of experts who can prove you and I are wrong. I can also find other experts to prove they are wrong.
So, just to see what it would be, logged into a few different sites where you can supposedly get what Abominablecare will cost you.
Depending on the site you visit and whom you believe, my annual insurance cost is $0 to $400+ per month. This depends on the insurance company, the website, how many live sacrifices I made at the last full moon, the bribes I have accepted, the plan I choose, the metallic level of coverage (lead is not an option nor is aluminum) whether or not the website admin had sex last night and a great number of other completely irrelevant factors.
If you can get in, here's the Georgia version of the ACA.
Here's what one site promises:
According to all the sites I have found, I am also eligible for a "subsidy" of about $1500, as best I remember. This is how my cost of $0 to $450 a month is computed.I am also required, under law, to get insurance or I am fined.
So. With this information, here's my take on this plan:
I am required under the law to take money I have not earned from people I do not know and will never meet.
If I do not take this money, then this same law penalizes me.
This is forced robbery. Either I take from people whether they are willing to give or not or that same item is taken from me against my will.
Forced robbery.
I am also told this "subsidy" is in the form of a tax credit.
Ah.
If I understand this, which I don't, this means I still have to pay the monthly premiums, which I cannot afford. Then, once a year, I get to deduct the cost of the insurance from my income. This lowers the amount of taxes I have to pay.
It is not a 1:1.
For every dollar I pay, if I did, in health insurance, I wind up getting less than 30 cents back in my refund.
The alternative is to get back less in my tax refund. With the fine at 1 percent of my taxable income, the drop in my refund is insignificant to what I have to pay in premiums.
If this math is correct it is far cheaper for me to not get insurance.
Except, I am of course wrong as a lot of people have already told me. Each has a different explanation of why I am wrong, all the others are wrong and why they are correct.
Friday, October 25, 2013
Chasing the Joneses Part II
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
As promised, Part II. I warn you, this reads like it was a cross between an economist and a sociologist. Except possibly more obfuscatory. In case you wonder, if you cross the two, you get a political scientist.
TED talk, which aired a piece mentioning a Mexican is the richest man in the word, said Gandhi, the Indian leader who is massively misunderstood by most, suggested there are two economic choices in the world. Well, Niall Ferguson said it, but it was broadcast as part of the TED Talk.
1) Accept disparity and wealth gaps.
2) Institutionalize poverty.
Neither is a pleasant concept to me.
OPTION 1
What worries me more is a different nightmare scenario, is a universe in which a few geniuses invent Google and its ilk and the rest of us are employed giving them massages. Chrystia Freeland. See TED Talk above
Oy.
Karl Marx did examine human nature and the rejection of Option 1. He got things twisted like Ayn Rand. Both substituted their own person view of how humanity should be for how humanity actually is. Neither were willing to admit a basic tenet of human nature which can be summed up in two acronyms - NIMBY and CAVE. (CAVE is Citizens Against Virtually Everything).
They also ignore matter of simple physics which translates directly across to humanity - Nature abhors a vacuum. Witness Somalia for the human social-economic-political version of this physics statement.
And, yes, they also ignore something else. Human beings are fundamentally lazy. Scream, yell, holler, complain and call me an idiot all you want to. But the fact remains if you were given everything you needed to be satisfied, you’d do nothing. Argue all you want, but below I’m gonna prove my point. Yes, there are the rare exceptions, but exceptions are just that.
OPTION 2
As best I can see with my intense myopia, this is now the case in the United States. We have achieved multiple generations living off the public dole. If this is not institutionalized poverty, I ask how you define it.
And here is what has set the United States apart from the rest of the world and the history of civilization. We reward those who have never done anything except exist, never will do anything except exist and will not do anything except exist at the expense of others who have never met these “existence only” entities. Further, we use violence to extort support from the others for the “existence only” entities. Call ‘em EOE (which fits in far more ways than one).
PROVING THE POINT
I bring to you a shining example of this mentality.
Ages 2 and 3. Left home alone. Took two of ‘em to take the other person home. And she's worried about food stamps.
I give you another. Angel Adams. Google this woman and see the enormous number of legit news stories which crop up about here.
These people are not aberrations. These people are not isolated incidents. These people are not skewing the bell curve. These people are increasingly typical.
They are the EOE and they are growing.
EN MASSE
When I say EOE I mean large masses of EOE, not isolated incidents like a monarchy or dictatorship. Anthropological studies of societies which do not have wealth as a concept show those people under study do precisely enough to make sure they have enough. No more, no less.
Some other nations have since followed suite, but we led the way.
If Marx was still around and witnessed the EOE, I wonder if he would revise his social-economic theories. Just for the record, true communism as espoused by Marx has never existed on a national scale. For that matter, true capitalism on a national scale has also never existed, but I suspect Somalia comes closer than any other country.
OVERHEARD
Lemme slap some quotes on you
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."
- Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859)
This one has been twisted a bit over time and then attributed to Benjamin Franklin. He never said it that we know of. But here’s the twisted version - When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
- Norman Thomas (US Socialist Presidential Candidate)
"There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government."
- Daniel Webster
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
As promised, Part II. I warn you, this reads like it was a cross between an economist and a sociologist. Except possibly more obfuscatory. In case you wonder, if you cross the two, you get a political scientist.
TED talk, which aired a piece mentioning a Mexican is the richest man in the word, said Gandhi, the Indian leader who is massively misunderstood by most, suggested there are two economic choices in the world. Well, Niall Ferguson said it, but it was broadcast as part of the TED Talk.
1) Accept disparity and wealth gaps.
2) Institutionalize poverty.
Neither is a pleasant concept to me.
OPTION 1
What worries me more is a different nightmare scenario, is a universe in which a few geniuses invent Google and its ilk and the rest of us are employed giving them massages. Chrystia Freeland. See TED Talk above
Oy.
Karl Marx did examine human nature and the rejection of Option 1. He got things twisted like Ayn Rand. Both substituted their own person view of how humanity should be for how humanity actually is. Neither were willing to admit a basic tenet of human nature which can be summed up in two acronyms - NIMBY and CAVE. (CAVE is Citizens Against Virtually Everything).
They also ignore matter of simple physics which translates directly across to humanity - Nature abhors a vacuum. Witness Somalia for the human social-economic-political version of this physics statement.
And, yes, they also ignore something else. Human beings are fundamentally lazy. Scream, yell, holler, complain and call me an idiot all you want to. But the fact remains if you were given everything you needed to be satisfied, you’d do nothing. Argue all you want, but below I’m gonna prove my point. Yes, there are the rare exceptions, but exceptions are just that.
OPTION 2
As best I can see with my intense myopia, this is now the case in the United States. We have achieved multiple generations living off the public dole. If this is not institutionalized poverty, I ask how you define it.
And here is what has set the United States apart from the rest of the world and the history of civilization. We reward those who have never done anything except exist, never will do anything except exist and will not do anything except exist at the expense of others who have never met these “existence only” entities. Further, we use violence to extort support from the others for the “existence only” entities. Call ‘em EOE (which fits in far more ways than one).
PROVING THE POINT
I bring to you a shining example of this mentality.
Ages 2 and 3. Left home alone. Took two of ‘em to take the other person home. And she's worried about food stamps.
I give you another. Angel Adams. Google this woman and see the enormous number of legit news stories which crop up about here.
These people are not aberrations. These people are not isolated incidents. These people are not skewing the bell curve. These people are increasingly typical.
They are the EOE and they are growing.
EN MASSE
When I say EOE I mean large masses of EOE, not isolated incidents like a monarchy or dictatorship. Anthropological studies of societies which do not have wealth as a concept show those people under study do precisely enough to make sure they have enough. No more, no less.
Some other nations have since followed suite, but we led the way.
If Marx was still around and witnessed the EOE, I wonder if he would revise his social-economic theories. Just for the record, true communism as espoused by Marx has never existed on a national scale. For that matter, true capitalism on a national scale has also never existed, but I suspect Somalia comes closer than any other country.
OVERHEARD
Lemme slap some quotes on you
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."
- Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859)
This one has been twisted a bit over time and then attributed to Benjamin Franklin. He never said it that we know of. But here’s the twisted version - When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
- Norman Thomas (US Socialist Presidential Candidate)
"There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government."
- Daniel Webster
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
There go the Joneses
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A piece on NPR about the growing wealth gap (the world's richest man is a Mexican) in the world and this article got me to thinking about something my Aunt Ginger said many years ago.
She said, and I paraphrase, "We are doing just as well as our parents before us and before us and before us. We think we're not doing as well because we believe we must have more."
Truth.
If the truth hurts, yer living wrong. Lemme bring the pain.
Look around you. For that matter, if you are looking straight ahead as you have to be to read this you are using a serious load of things you can live without. Computer. Electricity. Internet. Software. Depending on how far you want to run this train, you can go through shipping, manufacturing, sales, etc etc etc.
Since you are reading this, I am going to state you have far more house than you actually need. House being defined as your domicile, digs, crib, etc.
Continuing this "'cause yer reading this" narrative, you have TV, cable or satellite, cell phones, probably a suite of other electronic gadgetry, none of which existed 100 years ago. Some of it came into existence during your lifetime. Internet access is now being touted across the globe as a "basic human right" apparently on the same level as potable water, adequate food, freedom from persecution.
Ah. We now have an inalienable right to amusing cat videos, bad porn and the ability to get into a lose-your-rationality argument with people all over the globe whom we've never met, never will meet and don't want to meet about things that don't really matter.
There's a WTF moment for me.
In your house, you have a lot of food that requires extensive and unnecessary artificial preservation efforts - chilled or frozen to be exact. The fridge and freezer. The canned and dry goods you have are less than what must be temperature controlled.
Take a real look at yourself. What can you genuinely do without?
I have challenged several people who tell me "I don't have enough money" to let me adjust their budgets. I guarantee them I can cut their expenses by 25 percent.
So far, no one has taken me up on the offer. Why? They know I'm right. You know I'm right.
You can cut your expenses dramatically. You choose not to.
This "standard of living" which you insist on having is not what you need to live. It's what you want to live.
The truth is you can do with a lot less. The truth is you'd rather live the lie than embrace the truth. Hey. You're not unique. The rest of the world is right there with you. Even Mark Boyle, as noted in the beginning, is truly not living without money and still has more than he really needs.
Tomorrow, provided I get a moment, I'm gonna take a look at two extremely economic concepts that relate to this subject. If not tomorrow, then when I get a moment.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A piece on NPR about the growing wealth gap (the world's richest man is a Mexican) in the world and this article got me to thinking about something my Aunt Ginger said many years ago.
She said, and I paraphrase, "We are doing just as well as our parents before us and before us and before us. We think we're not doing as well because we believe we must have more."
 |
| I like pie. |
Truth.
If the truth hurts, yer living wrong. Lemme bring the pain.
Look around you. For that matter, if you are looking straight ahead as you have to be to read this you are using a serious load of things you can live without. Computer. Electricity. Internet. Software. Depending on how far you want to run this train, you can go through shipping, manufacturing, sales, etc etc etc.
Since you are reading this, I am going to state you have far more house than you actually need. House being defined as your domicile, digs, crib, etc.
Continuing this "'cause yer reading this" narrative, you have TV, cable or satellite, cell phones, probably a suite of other electronic gadgetry, none of which existed 100 years ago. Some of it came into existence during your lifetime. Internet access is now being touted across the globe as a "basic human right" apparently on the same level as potable water, adequate food, freedom from persecution.
 |
| You can has right to laugh at me? |
Ah. We now have an inalienable right to amusing cat videos, bad porn and the ability to get into a lose-your-rationality argument with people all over the globe whom we've never met, never will meet and don't want to meet about things that don't really matter.
There's a WTF moment for me.
In your house, you have a lot of food that requires extensive and unnecessary artificial preservation efforts - chilled or frozen to be exact. The fridge and freezer. The canned and dry goods you have are less than what must be temperature controlled.
Take a real look at yourself. What can you genuinely do without?
I have challenged several people who tell me "I don't have enough money" to let me adjust their budgets. I guarantee them I can cut their expenses by 25 percent.
So far, no one has taken me up on the offer. Why? They know I'm right. You know I'm right.
You can cut your expenses dramatically. You choose not to.
This "standard of living" which you insist on having is not what you need to live. It's what you want to live.
The truth is you can do with a lot less. The truth is you'd rather live the lie than embrace the truth. Hey. You're not unique. The rest of the world is right there with you. Even Mark Boyle, as noted in the beginning, is truly not living without money and still has more than he really needs.
Tomorrow, provided I get a moment, I'm gonna take a look at two extremely economic concepts that relate to this subject. If not tomorrow, then when I get a moment.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Well, afternoon ma'am.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
If you have arachnophobia, quit reading now. If the thought of spiders does not bother you, lay on MacDuff.
The memories are very very very vague now, but when I was somewhere between 3 and 5 I had a hallucination of spiders, big'uns, on my bed. Scared me to no end.
Spiders no longer terrify me. Rather, they impress me immensely. I do respect the dangerous ones and will destroy them if they are around places kids are apt to be. On opening day, I took a stick and swirled it around the inside of my deer blind to remove any spiders and their webs. It was not malicious on my part. I just didn't want them, especially possibly dangerous ones.
So. I sit in my stand and watch what I call wolf spiders climb around. They are not wolf spiders, but I call 'em that. Every now and then, I pop the blind fabric just enough to make the spider leap away. They can jump amazing distances.
I've watched 'em ambush and attempt to ambush insects. I once watched a spider spinning down a single line from the roof of a blind get ambushed by a green anole. The lizard lept across the blind, snagging the spider mid-leap. How quickly the predator becomes the prey.
This year I headed into the woods to refill my feeder and a pair of spiders, beautiful creatures, had spun their hunting webs across the path I needed. As I was pulling a wagon, by hand, with 200 pounds of corn and other stuff, finding a route around was not going to happen.
"Sorry about this ladies," I said, breaking down one of the limbs they'd spun to. I did it carefully and slowly as to not kill them.
Ladies, yes. Male spiders do not spin that kind of web. They are also smaller and far less colorful. Males spend their time wandering around looking for a female to mate with.
Truly I was a bit unhappy at disturbing the two spiders. They are major insect predators. They delight in skeeters.
Imagine then my delight when I returned the next day to find the largest of the ladies had rebuilt a web across the path.
"Well, afternoon, ma'am. My, aren't you beautiful," I said to her, thinking what a shame it was gonna be that I had to ruin her work again.
Except I didn't. One of the support lines was strung to a tree limb high above my head. With a minimal amount of ducking, I could ease under that line where it attached to the main web. I did so. Coming back, I got a look at her equally amazing underside.
I again exchanging pleasantries with her. Whether she replied or not, I do not know. Regardless, she stayed where she was and I sat in a deer stand admiring her cousins climbing around me.
Coming out of the woods at night I see many many many many many tiny green dots on the ground. One day I stopped and got down to see what it was. Tiny spiders. Hundreds, nay thousands of them. Several per square foot.
This bothered me because I knew I was killing some every time I walked in the woods. Cannot be helped, there are so many of them.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
If you have arachnophobia, quit reading now. If the thought of spiders does not bother you, lay on MacDuff.
The memories are very very very vague now, but when I was somewhere between 3 and 5 I had a hallucination of spiders, big'uns, on my bed. Scared me to no end.
So. I sit in my stand and watch what I call wolf spiders climb around. They are not wolf spiders, but I call 'em that. Every now and then, I pop the blind fabric just enough to make the spider leap away. They can jump amazing distances.
 |
| Similar to the one at my stand |
This year I headed into the woods to refill my feeder and a pair of spiders, beautiful creatures, had spun their hunting webs across the path I needed. As I was pulling a wagon, by hand, with 200 pounds of corn and other stuff, finding a route around was not going to happen.
"Sorry about this ladies," I said, breaking down one of the limbs they'd spun to. I did it carefully and slowly as to not kill them.
Ladies, yes. Male spiders do not spin that kind of web. They are also smaller and far less colorful. Males spend their time wandering around looking for a female to mate with.
Truly I was a bit unhappy at disturbing the two spiders. They are major insect predators. They delight in skeeters.
Imagine then my delight when I returned the next day to find the largest of the ladies had rebuilt a web across the path.
"Well, afternoon, ma'am. My, aren't you beautiful," I said to her, thinking what a shame it was gonna be that I had to ruin her work again.
 |
| A very cool crab spider. |
Except I didn't. One of the support lines was strung to a tree limb high above my head. With a minimal amount of ducking, I could ease under that line where it attached to the main web. I did so. Coming back, I got a look at her equally amazing underside.
I again exchanging pleasantries with her. Whether she replied or not, I do not know. Regardless, she stayed where she was and I sat in a deer stand admiring her cousins climbing around me.
Coming out of the woods at night I see many many many many many tiny green dots on the ground. One day I stopped and got down to see what it was. Tiny spiders. Hundreds, nay thousands of them. Several per square foot.
This bothered me because I knew I was killing some every time I walked in the woods. Cannot be helped, there are so many of them.
Monday, October 21, 2013
Well. That was stupid. Sort of.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
So I got re-bent this morning going over a major news event in my community. Not a good way to start a Monday morning. Got over that.
Somewhat justified anger in that one.
Then, after lunch I got mad again about something that hasn't happened, probably never will happen and if I remember my state laws correctly, can't happen! Sheesh. Talk about over-reacting...
Anyway, here's the setup. I signed Jesse up for another hunting trip with an outfit that is supposed to take handicapped kids hunting, pay for everything and etc. If I sound less than enthusiastic, it's because I am.
Of all the people who've promised to take Jesse hunting, two have delivered. One group I'm personally associated with and Chris & Jock in Washington State. So far we're batting less than 30 percent on hunting trips.
So this afternoon I also signed up our farm for handicapped kids hunting. The only requirements are the kids can shoot whatever they want, provide it's not a pet or a human. Willing to make an exception for some humans.
I got to thinking about this and hunting and what might happen if a kid kills something out of season and the game warden comes along.
That's where I got mad. A series of possibilities resulting in me getting mad.
My ire was directed at the hypothetical game warden in this case. There's no way I'd let him take the kid's animal or write the child a ticket. He'd have to ticket me and then come court day, I'd explode in righteous indignation.
I calmed down and reflected, it'd have to be a seriously cold-hearted game warden to ticket a handicapped child on a hunt of a lifetime. Then as I remember, Georgia law allows people with a terminal illness to hunt deer any time they want to. Which is the way it should be.
So. Calm now and sharing my foolishness with you.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
So I got re-bent this morning going over a major news event in my community. Not a good way to start a Monday morning. Got over that.
Somewhat justified anger in that one.
Then, after lunch I got mad again about something that hasn't happened, probably never will happen and if I remember my state laws correctly, can't happen! Sheesh. Talk about over-reacting...
Anyway, here's the setup. I signed Jesse up for another hunting trip with an outfit that is supposed to take handicapped kids hunting, pay for everything and etc. If I sound less than enthusiastic, it's because I am.
Of all the people who've promised to take Jesse hunting, two have delivered. One group I'm personally associated with and Chris & Jock in Washington State. So far we're batting less than 30 percent on hunting trips.
So this afternoon I also signed up our farm for handicapped kids hunting. The only requirements are the kids can shoot whatever they want, provide it's not a pet or a human. Willing to make an exception for some humans.
I got to thinking about this and hunting and what might happen if a kid kills something out of season and the game warden comes along.
That's where I got mad. A series of possibilities resulting in me getting mad.
My ire was directed at the hypothetical game warden in this case. There's no way I'd let him take the kid's animal or write the child a ticket. He'd have to ticket me and then come court day, I'd explode in righteous indignation.
I calmed down and reflected, it'd have to be a seriously cold-hearted game warden to ticket a handicapped child on a hunt of a lifetime. Then as I remember, Georgia law allows people with a terminal illness to hunt deer any time they want to. Which is the way it should be.
So. Calm now and sharing my foolishness with you.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
You're gonna eat THAT?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Warning. This blog will disturb some people A LOT.
Before you decide to rail at me, lemme point this out. That, in this case, is something the United States President approved for human consumption. While I'm here lemme also remind you this same POTUS dined on something far more familiar to the average US resident.
The French, famous for eating snails, collaborating with the enemy and having snooty attitudes eat it. OK, forget the French. The fact is, beyond the scene in "Oh Brother Where Art Thou?" there's a history of eating this in the US too.
 |
| My order. |
Yeah. Horse jerky. When I saw the package this morning on the counter at the office, I was seriously excited. Still am. One more critter to mark off my "To Be Eaten" list, a list which no longer includes beluga whale and ants, IOW, I've eaten those. Never mind the accidental and incident consumption of the occasional insect. Seriously. If you live in the Deep South, sooner or later you're going to swallow a gnat.
In case you are about to hurl the remains of meals you've eaten for the past few weeks, lemme also point out you probably have no issue eating moldy milk. Some people may not like cheese or are lactose intolerant, but by and large it's not disgusting. Except it is.
My friend Danwen, a local, gave it to me straight:
“I can’t eat cheese. It’s not the flavor; it’s psychological.”
Curdled, moldy milk just doesn’t appeal to many Chinese.
 |
| Yep. Eyeballs. For the Explorer's Club |
Cultural taboos about eating things are often just that, cultural.
As I tell people, "If it ain't gonna hurt you and it's good, eat it."
Willie Turner told me he was at the fire department one day smoking some goat. A gent came along and inquired. Willie served him up a plate of the meat and the man said it was delicious. He asked what it was. Willie told him. The man went and lost his meal in the bushes.
Yanno, our brain will make us do things that are not good for us.
Would you eat leather? Ok then, would you eat pork rinds? Cracklins? Tell me what is the difference between naturally treated leather and a slice of rind-on country bacon.
Would you eat an unhatched fowl embryo cooked on a sheet of oil-coated steel? Would you eat a serving of chicken eggs? The difference?
Perception matters. Like in this one.
 |
| Sweet Thai Rat |
Some years ago I got into a brief discussion with an animal rights activist who gave me a hard time for eating deer. I told him I picked up road kill deer and ate that. I asked if there was anything morally objectional to that. He replied, "No, if you don't have a problem with being a disgusting cannibal" or something similar. My memory has faded. In other words, his true colors came out and his true objection to was meat consumption. I'm cool with that, but not with his disingenuous way of hatin' on me cause I hunt.
Really though, what's your nutritional objection to eating horse if you eat meat?
When I offered to share my horse jerky with the office crew, I was met with mild rejections. Linda said “You are a carnivore.” Indeed. Will be sharing my horse jerky today with people brave enough to try it.
I plan to order some kangaroo jerky soon. I've looked for elephant meat which could be shipped to the US, but so far no luck. I have found a source for other meats I'd like to try. But at the prices for some of those meats, I'll just have to wonder what it's like.
In case you missed the link at the top and wish to order some horse jerky of your own, cowleysfinefood.com. Tell Martin that Ben sent ya.
In case you wonder, my jerky is slightly smoky, sweet and has the merest hint of chili pepper. Very good. Reminds me of my coon jerky.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Where's Einstein when I need him? Oh yeah, dead.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
There are times when I truly wish I had much better grasp of mathematics than I do. In case you're not wondering, Dad was a Georgia Tech structural engineering graduate and one of the 5 smartest people I've ever met. I met Dr. Edward Teller if that tells you anything.
There's a point in here, but I need to say a few things first. Feel free to skip to the header below.
And so when I was but a junior in high school, the PHS Class of '85 (GO EAGLES!) was given a series of aptitude tests. I scored out at a 6th grade level in math.
Dad was beyond aghast. Mom, who developed an ulcer learning calculus without Dad's help to spite him, 'cause he said she'd never learn it, was much more understanding.
Mom and I have a development condition called Dyscalculia. Mine is a lot worse than hers and fortunately, my children did not inherit this. Mine is so bad I have problems dialing phone numbers, really. Ask the crew at the office. Most of the time they have to punch in the fax numbers for me.
Not as in the absence of light, but Dark Matter, Dark Energy and as one of the scientist types hypothesized, Dark Life.
The problem with Einstein's model of the universe and everyone else's is that when they explain all the matter which can be seen and accounted for, it's not enough. Yeah, brain sprainer. There's just not enough to account for the universe continuing to expand, rotation of the various galaxies and so forth.
Brief rant. So, what did science do? This is what is hilarious to me. They made up something to make the equations fit. I note when the non scientific community "makes up something" to explain anything, they are ridiculed. Science does it and it becomes sacred. Rant off.
The Pop Sci article tries to bring down the idea of dark matter into terms the readers of the magazine can understand. In other words, they dumb it down.
This bothers me. As something is always lost in translation, any time you try and reduce a very complicated subject to a less complex level, something is lost. As I read this article on the Dark Side (interpret however you wish, you're just as correct as the "scientists"), I wondered constantly what we readers were missing. How much was left out? How much was distorted? What couldn't be reduced to English?
Throwing yet ANOTHER mental monkey wrench into this story is the statement toward the end.
If you add all the Dark which scientists, leaning on faith say exists (do not ridicule them!) with all the Light (matter and energy we can see), it only accounts for about a third of the sum total of Everything.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Well, OK. So what this means is Science (note capital S) is going to have to make up EVEN MORE stuff. I will continue to read dumbed down versions and wonder what's missing.
Hey! A thought just struck me. I can be like a scientist too! I'll just make up stuff to explain what I don't understand and whatever is left out of their explanations. It works for them, it'll work for me and I get to be a scientist!
Yanno, I'm now thinking this science stuff rocks and despite my inability to read a string of numbers longer than four digits. I too can be scientist. Correction, I am a scientist. Now I just need to put a bunch of gibberish down and join the secret scientific cabal so the rest will secretly approve of my work why publicly supporting it and tearing it apart.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
There are times when I truly wish I had much better grasp of mathematics than I do. In case you're not wondering, Dad was a Georgia Tech structural engineering graduate and one of the 5 smartest people I've ever met. I met Dr. Edward Teller if that tells you anything.
There's a point in here, but I need to say a few things first. Feel free to skip to the header below.
And so when I was but a junior in high school, the PHS Class of '85 (GO EAGLES!) was given a series of aptitude tests. I scored out at a 6th grade level in math.
Dad was beyond aghast. Mom, who developed an ulcer learning calculus without Dad's help to spite him, 'cause he said she'd never learn it, was much more understanding.
Mom and I have a development condition called Dyscalculia. Mine is a lot worse than hers and fortunately, my children did not inherit this. Mine is so bad I have problems dialing phone numbers, really. Ask the crew at the office. Most of the time they have to punch in the fax numbers for me.
RESUME READING HERE
So when I get my monthly edition of Popular Science, I sit down to read with much anticipation, delight and more than a little trepidation. This month's edition was one of those where I was really apprehensive. The main feature store is on Dark. |
| SCIENCE! |
Not as in the absence of light, but Dark Matter, Dark Energy and as one of the scientist types hypothesized, Dark Life.
The problem with Einstein's model of the universe and everyone else's is that when they explain all the matter which can be seen and accounted for, it's not enough. Yeah, brain sprainer. There's just not enough to account for the universe continuing to expand, rotation of the various galaxies and so forth.
Brief rant. So, what did science do? This is what is hilarious to me. They made up something to make the equations fit. I note when the non scientific community "makes up something" to explain anything, they are ridiculed. Science does it and it becomes sacred. Rant off.
The Pop Sci article tries to bring down the idea of dark matter into terms the readers of the magazine can understand. In other words, they dumb it down.
This bothers me. As something is always lost in translation, any time you try and reduce a very complicated subject to a less complex level, something is lost. As I read this article on the Dark Side (interpret however you wish, you're just as correct as the "scientists"), I wondered constantly what we readers were missing. How much was left out? How much was distorted? What couldn't be reduced to English?
Throwing yet ANOTHER mental monkey wrench into this story is the statement toward the end.
If you add all the Dark which scientists, leaning on faith say exists (do not ridicule them!) with all the Light (matter and energy we can see), it only accounts for about a third of the sum total of Everything.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Well, OK. So what this means is Science (note capital S) is going to have to make up EVEN MORE stuff. I will continue to read dumbed down versions and wonder what's missing.
Hey! A thought just struck me. I can be like a scientist too! I'll just make up stuff to explain what I don't understand and whatever is left out of their explanations. It works for them, it'll work for me and I get to be a scientist!
Yanno, I'm now thinking this science stuff rocks and despite my inability to read a string of numbers longer than four digits. I too can be scientist. Correction, I am a scientist. Now I just need to put a bunch of gibberish down and join the secret scientific cabal so the rest will secretly approve of my work why publicly supporting it and tearing it apart.
Monday, October 14, 2013
With age comes many things
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
It may be a deeply bred sense of responsibility. It may be age. I'm chalking this one up to middle age.
To 'splain:
www.BakerBrosPR.com
This is the writing company I own with my brother. We write. Pick a topic and we've probably written about it. Not kidding either.
What we've written over the years goes up to master's level dissertations. Not done that or any kind of more advanced writing yet, but we did get a request to do a Master's paper. When the guy was quoted the price he declined. I suspect he had to push his eyeballs back into place too.
We have a pretty big client based in Europe. Assignments coming across the pond have a specific word length for the articles. In an effort to hit that mark, I went searching one day for a word counter online.
I found Word Counter. 'Mazing how that just happened to have the very words I was looking for.
So I have been using this for a while. It counts words, characters and even gives you a keyword saturation count. For the work we sometimes do, this saturation is critical. So, I'm using this site and over the weekend I noticed there's a tip jar on the site.
Hrm. Now years ago, I'd have seen this tip jar, chuckled and went on about my business.
This stuck with me all weekend. So when I fired up PayPal on Sunday evening, I first put a fiver in the line. I looked at it for a while. I changed it to a $10.
The service is worth the $10 I sent to 'em.
I also use my freelance money to kick a bit toward Georgia Public Radio and Irock109. In years past, I would not have. I'da reasoned it's a free service and I'll ride that horse til it's dead. Now? I feel an obligation to support, as limited as it is, this kind of service.
I appreciate what they do, I know it costs money and I believe if I use it, I should pay. As much as it bothers me to admit it, this kind of economy I participate in is exactly what Ayn Rand promoted.
I am so middle-aged. I just hope I'm a better student of the human condition than Rand ever was.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
It may be a deeply bred sense of responsibility. It may be age. I'm chalking this one up to middle age.
To 'splain:
www.BakerBrosPR.com
This is the writing company I own with my brother. We write. Pick a topic and we've probably written about it. Not kidding either.
What we've written over the years goes up to master's level dissertations. Not done that or any kind of more advanced writing yet, but we did get a request to do a Master's paper. When the guy was quoted the price he declined. I suspect he had to push his eyeballs back into place too.
We have a pretty big client based in Europe. Assignments coming across the pond have a specific word length for the articles. In an effort to hit that mark, I went searching one day for a word counter online.
I found Word Counter. 'Mazing how that just happened to have the very words I was looking for.
So I have been using this for a while. It counts words, characters and even gives you a keyword saturation count. For the work we sometimes do, this saturation is critical. So, I'm using this site and over the weekend I noticed there's a tip jar on the site.
Hrm. Now years ago, I'd have seen this tip jar, chuckled and went on about my business.
This stuck with me all weekend. So when I fired up PayPal on Sunday evening, I first put a fiver in the line. I looked at it for a while. I changed it to a $10.
The service is worth the $10 I sent to 'em.
I also use my freelance money to kick a bit toward Georgia Public Radio and Irock109. In years past, I would not have. I'da reasoned it's a free service and I'll ride that horse til it's dead. Now? I feel an obligation to support, as limited as it is, this kind of service.
I appreciate what they do, I know it costs money and I believe if I use it, I should pay. As much as it bothers me to admit it, this kind of economy I participate in is exactly what Ayn Rand promoted.
I am so middle-aged. I just hope I'm a better student of the human condition than Rand ever was.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
A most excellent question!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Meantime, some of my thoughts.
If I am walking down the street and someone comes up and demands money to spend on things I don't approve of and threatens me with physical violence if I do not give him this money, is this legal?
If I am walking down the street and the same man comes up to me, makes the same demand and the same threats and has an IRS badge, is this legal?
As above, but the man now has an IRS badge and a warrant for my arrest for not giving him the money. Is this legal?
What, really, is the difference? The end result is the same; my money has been taken from me against my will upon threat of violence and used for ends I do not support.
The difference, apparently, is robbery becomes legal when institutionalized by government. For that matter, a whole lot of what government does is legal ONLY because it's a fiat from government. How's that for tautology. If you or I try to do the same thing, it is illegal.
What gives you the right to take what I have? Careful how you answer because it can be used against you and will when I come to take your stuff.
"Less fortunate" you say? A man goes out and works all day long while someone else sits on a front porch all day long and the porch sitter is "less fortunate?" OK, that was an easy one.
A man works all day and through no fault of his own suddenly can't work any more. Why should people who do not know him be forced to support him? Why is he more important than a starving child in Africa? Why should I be threatened with violence if I choose to not support him?
The only way to answer these questions is through a moral code. Which begs another question: What makes your moral code superior to mine? Why should your morals be codified into the law and mine rejected? Caveat - my moral code says intentional violence against others cannot be permitted. Taking my money against my will on threat of violence is intentional violence.
"It's the right thing to do" as you may say is a moral statement. I can reply, "It is not the right thing to do" and my words are just as valid as yours.
Some people (Hi Renee) like to point to Jesus and His commands. Mention was made that Jesus tossed the money changers out of the temple. Not entirely sure how that fits into this discussion, but that was said and I pass it along.
Jesus never said government should feed the masses. Jesus said His followers should engage in charity. As for the money changers, He knocked their money to the dirt. He didn't take any of it. Jesus never took from anyone who was not first willing to give. (See how I tied that right back in?)
Choice is what I, you, we and the guy who just ducked around the corner so you won't see him when you turn around. Unfortunately, having the option of inflicting violence on someone who won't go along with you is also a choice. Is that fair? Just? If so, who gets to make that rule and what happens if someone comes along and has enough power to change that rule?
So where is the fairness and social justice due me when I am threatened with violence if I refuse to give?
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
The stupidity of term limits
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Major rant incoming.
Every time I hear someone say "We need term limits" I reply "We have term limits. They're called elections."
This immediately results in the person saying we don't have term limits, politicians buy elections and so on and so on.
Really?
A few questions.
• Do you really want government telling you whom you can and cannot vote for? We're at war with countries right now which have this kind of system.
• If you say politicians buy the elections, then why are you selling your vote?
• If you object to long term politicians, why do you vote for them?
• Do you know who ran for office, all of 'em, in the last election?
• What do you know about the "third party" candidates?
• Are you smart enough to make up your own mind or do you need more government oversight?
Now that I have offended people, lemme ask the real question: Are you stupid enough to really believe term limits are effective?
Yes, term limits keeps the president limited to two terms. How many of you would vote for Ronald Reagan (were he still alive and capable) for president again? How many of you would vote for Bill Clinton again?
Yeah. Thought so. Poll after poll after poll, and more importantly actual elections, shows incumbents are supported and get back into office. "Politicians are the problem, but MY politician ain't part of the problem." So says you in election after election.
You don't really want term limits. What you want is the ability to limit all the other voters choices. You want NIMBY limits. In other words, control what other people do and leave you the hell alone.
You probably complain there's too much money in politics, too much in the campaigns and only the rich and well-connected to the rich people can get into office.
Ummmm, 'scuse me but for whom did you vote in the last election?
Pork barrel spending is how politicians stay in the news when no controversy is brewing. They tout their accomplishments in "bringing home the bacon" from the seat of government. "They don't understand why we need this, must have this. It's getting our just returns BACK from the taxes we pay."
Yeah, it takes seniority to get the big bucks flowing back to a district. Neophytes and freshmen don't have that kinda pull. Gotta send him back to keep that river of cash flowing and it's damned well time to cut government grants and handouts to those idiots who can't manage their own money.
How much do you know, that you can back up with facts, about the candidates for the most recent election. The farther removed you are from the election, the less you know. You may know a great deal about the people running for City Council or School Board. How about state legislature? Congress? President?
Tell me how much you know, which is fact-based, based on his voting record, based on statements he has made which can be verified about any candidate for federal office. How about Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who ran for president. For that matter, gimme the same on ANY candidate for president other than Mitt Romney or the current liar in chief. Now tell me the same about ANY candidate for president who was not on the Reboobican primary ticket.
I knew you couldn't.
"Those guys can't get elected."
THAT is not the biggest cop-out I have ever heard, but it's in the top 5. No, "those guys" can't get elected in an electorate which insists on being spoon fed information and believes attack ads on TV while refusing to do even a tiny amount of research. I've long been told "you get what you pay for."
The facts are out there. The information is out there. You don't want to assimilate it. You do not want to learn about the people who make the decisions that will affect your life. This is not ignorance. This is sheer unadulterated STUPIDITY.
HELP WANTED: Must be able to think for those who refuse to do so themselves. Must be willing to accept large amounts of cash from donors. Must be willing to endure ridicule, abuse and scorn while doing exactly what you were hired to do. Must be willing to demonize certain people in public while having supper and drinks with them when the media isn't watching. Must be willing to complain, moan, whine and point the finger at colleagues while refusing to take any blame. Must be willing to reapply for the job periodically, with a 90 percent chance of being rehired.
We offer a modest salary, sometimes not enough to keep everything running which you must have to hold the office, generous retirement, plenty of perks on the side which you'll need, but we reserve the right to raise hell about this. We're not going to think this through, you see.
To apply, run for office.
You don't want term limits. You want rights limits. You want to be excused from thinking for yourself. You want to be able to complain about things you refuse to understand. You want to complain about not having rights while handing those rights away. You complain about big government while demanding more government. You don't trust government while handing more and more of yourself to government every day. And you want term limits? You want this selfsame government which you so despise to tell you that you can't vote for someone?
What you really want is an abdication of responsibility.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Major rant incoming.
Every time I hear someone say "We need term limits" I reply "We have term limits. They're called elections."
This immediately results in the person saying we don't have term limits, politicians buy elections and so on and so on.
Really?
A few questions.
• Do you really want government telling you whom you can and cannot vote for? We're at war with countries right now which have this kind of system.
• If you say politicians buy the elections, then why are you selling your vote?
• If you object to long term politicians, why do you vote for them?
• Do you know who ran for office, all of 'em, in the last election?
• What do you know about the "third party" candidates?
• Are you smart enough to make up your own mind or do you need more government oversight?
Now that I have offended people, lemme ask the real question: Are you stupid enough to really believe term limits are effective?
NIMBY LIMITS
Yes, term limits keeps the president limited to two terms. How many of you would vote for Ronald Reagan (were he still alive and capable) for president again? How many of you would vote for Bill Clinton again?
Yeah. Thought so. Poll after poll after poll, and more importantly actual elections, shows incumbents are supported and get back into office. "Politicians are the problem, but MY politician ain't part of the problem." So says you in election after election.
You don't really want term limits. What you want is the ability to limit all the other voters choices. You want NIMBY limits. In other words, control what other people do and leave you the hell alone.
VOTES FOR SALE
You probably complain there's too much money in politics, too much in the campaigns and only the rich and well-connected to the rich people can get into office.
Ummmm, 'scuse me but for whom did you vote in the last election?
WELL CONNECTED
Or, the Science of Cognitive Dissonance
Yeah, it takes seniority to get the big bucks flowing back to a district. Neophytes and freshmen don't have that kinda pull. Gotta send him back to keep that river of cash flowing and it's damned well time to cut government grants and handouts to those idiots who can't manage their own money.
IGNORANCE IS BLISS
Tell me how much you know, which is fact-based, based on his voting record, based on statements he has made which can be verified about any candidate for federal office. How about Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who ran for president. For that matter, gimme the same on ANY candidate for president other than Mitt Romney or the current liar in chief. Now tell me the same about ANY candidate for president who was not on the Reboobican primary ticket.
I knew you couldn't.
"Those guys can't get elected."
THAT is not the biggest cop-out I have ever heard, but it's in the top 5. No, "those guys" can't get elected in an electorate which insists on being spoon fed information and believes attack ads on TV while refusing to do even a tiny amount of research. I've long been told "you get what you pay for."
The facts are out there. The information is out there. You don't want to assimilate it. You do not want to learn about the people who make the decisions that will affect your life. This is not ignorance. This is sheer unadulterated STUPIDITY.
NANNY NEEDED
We offer a modest salary, sometimes not enough to keep everything running which you must have to hold the office, generous retirement, plenty of perks on the side which you'll need, but we reserve the right to raise hell about this. We're not going to think this through, you see.
To apply, run for office.
TERM LIMITS
What you really want is an abdication of responsibility.
Friday, October 4, 2013
Publish, Perish Or Just Make Stuff Up And Publish Anyway
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I had a lit teacher in college who told us one day he'd not gotten a raise in a while because he hadn't managed to get anything published. In the world of advanced academia, you get ahead by getting your work published. "Publish or perish" is the byword.
I have to be boring for just a moment. Bear with me.
The Internet has made this ever more easier, especially where really complicated stuff is concerned. It used to be that for specialty magazines in sciences, an annual subscription could cost as much as $10,000. Yeah. 10 grand for a mag that came out a few times a year.
These publications are also "peer reviewed" meaning other people in the same field review the articles before they are printed. The reviewers do everything short of using physical flame throwers to make the paper and the work in it shrivel and die like a real vampire exposed to the sun. Solid science, except when it's not and the "peer-reviewed" work is later shown to be more full of holes than the federal budget.
Yeah.
Anyway, the Internet has now made science and scholarly journals even more of a joke than Sarah Palin. I heard the author of one such junk paper interviewed in NPR this morning. His "research" was a "drug" derived from lichens. The way he described the paper, even I could have seen it was a joke.
 |
| She blinded me with SCIENCE! Oy. I'm old. |
One thing that should raise a red flag about these publications is they charge the author to publish the report.
Less you think this is just an issue of these "open source" science journals, I have two things for you to consider.
Bohannon (the author of the faked report) and others also stressed that open-access journals are not the only unscrupulous ones. David Roos, a biologist at the University of Pennsylvania, told Bohannon that if the sting had “targeted the bottom tier of traditional, subscription-based journals… I strongly suspect you would get the same result.” WorldScience.net per link above
The top tier folks are not spotless either.
Industry giants like the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) charge outrageous subscription fees. At that, JAMA and all the big publications do not have clean hands. They have all been forced to repudiate a previously published article. This is rare, but it happens.
The most recent and most famous is the British Medical Journal Lancet article on vaccinations and autism. Despite being roundly shot down all over the place, the article was accepted, published and considered authoritative. It's still cited by people as authoritative.
Applying the "one bad apple" maxim to this, it casts doubt on the entire scholarly publishing industry.
Who ya gonna trust?
It appears, based on "science" we are entitled to our own facts.
Which brings me to an ancillary point. In other words, I'm heading off in yet another direction.
You may infer from this and other articles I've written about science that I don't trust science. You are partly correct. I have a deep distrust of science, scientists and so forth who speak in absolutes as if they are handing down the ultimate law of the universe. These people, I lump into the same category as the people who wear tinfoil hats and claim to have alien radio receivers embedded in their teeth.
There are scientists who I do trust and respect. They make their case and usually end with a statement like this: "Based on what we know right now." These people are willing to admit things can change. New evidence must be evaluated and that could change the "facts." Science, throughout the history of science, has repeatedly changed the "facts" to match new information and evidence. I can accept that.
What I will not accept (which in itself is hypocritical) is absolutism.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
He asked
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
This one has been knocking about in the grey matter for a while, years in fact. Today whilst listening to the Traveling Wilburys (the greatest Super Group of all time), I decided it's time to put it down.
We all know the story of the prodigal son. If ya don't know the story, click the link. Now that we're all up to speed more or less, I draw your attention to the end of the story. At the end, the son who never left asked the father why he didn't get such things as the returning son. Dad explained all the son had to do was ask.
The implication is the son never asked.
What if the son did ask?
Yevver been there?
Pick one of the three people. Dad. Prodigal Son. Other Son.
Me, I'm taking the side of the Other Son today. I do not refer to my biological family in this piece.
Been there, done that. Dutiful son. Showed up. Worked. Did what I was asked to do.
P.S. departed. Packed up and hauled out for parts unknown. Said wasn't coming back and threw his house key at me & Dad.
Dad looked at me. I looked at Dad. I said, "Well, I'll be glad to step in and pick up the slack. What he was doing, I can do."
Dad looked at me.
I then offered to do other things. He continued to look at me. Bear in mind I was not asking him to kill the fat calf for a party for me. Rather, I was offering to step up and take care of things that needed to be handled. I was doing this because those things needed doing. Yes, this did include taking on more responsibilities and would have elevated me in the family's overall hierarchy. I wasn't after that, but there to help.
Dad walked away. I shrugged my shoulders and went back to what I had been doing. We all trucked along, things not getting done, despite my offering to step in again. Things did head into negative territory in a bloody hurry too.
P.S. returned to much fanfare. He was immediately restored to his positions, duties and responsibilities, even though he left and specifically said he wanted nothing to do with it any more.
Before you accuse me of being resentful, lemme say right here. I was.
I stayed. He left. I asked. I was denied. P.S. comes back and without asking is put right back to where he was before he left as if nothing ever happened.
I admit to some mild resentment over this. However, my major issue was that I did ask and I was denied and rejected. He comes back and goes right back to what he was doing before.
Lemme ask you, what would your reaction be under these circumstances?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)