The Coming Exaflood: I saw this really great video and just had to share it. It really makes me think of what is here now and where the future might be going.


Enjoy!

Freedom of Religion vs. the Law of the United States. Recently the practices of a church came under the media microscope when Warren Jeffs, leader of the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, was convicted of being an accomplice to child rape because he facilitated the marriage of a minor against her wishes. This is a practice of the FLDS, a belief that they are to have multiple wives and overpopulate the world.

The question here for me is when does the practices of the church run afoul of the laws of the land? Are there other cases in the FLDS church where they are guilt of crimes? Certainly. In this exact case the leader was found guilty of being an accomplice, indicating that there were others. How about the “husband”? Why wasn't he being tried as an accomplice?

But when do we allow a belief system to break the law of the land, and when should it be enforced? This is a really tough question, not easily answered. For the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas the government felt that their stockpiling of illegal weapons constituted a direct threat to the community. In 1990 the US Government said that peyote, a power cactus drug, was illegal except for the members of the Native American communities that used the drug as a part of their religious ceremonies. And now the United States has convicted Jeffs for practicing his religious beliefs.

The key here is that the government differentiates between beliefs and practices. I may believe that it is okay to rob banks, but to practice that belief is wrong. In the above cases, those practices which brought harm or potential harm to others were stopped, but the use of a natural drug which had been used for centuries by a religious group was allowed.

What does that say for Christians, Jews, or Muslims? Our beliefs may be anything, but if we practice something that is against the law we may be held responsible. The Old Testament says that a homosexual should be stoned. To do so in America is against the law. By not stoning that person I don't think that God holds us accountable, but to do so surely would. Iran has taken the opposite view and they will string up the homosexual in public, but say they were guilty of something else to protect themselves from civil rights violations. A double standard, but at least a hypocrisy that they can live with.

I wonder if my faith will ever be challenged in such a way. I know that the politically correct thought police are working hard to stamp out all thought and speech that they disagree with, it is really just a matter of time until just speaking out against abortion or homosexuality will get me thrown into jail. It will be deemed hate speech if I quote the Bible because it is offensive to someone somewhere. Maybe time to move to some safe place where I can be free to believe what I want without fear.

Someplace like Ruby Ridge.

To Ban Addiction: Let me give you a scenario and think about what you might do. You are introduced to a new thing that brings you great pleasure, but it is addictive. You seem to never get enough. It is all you think about, you spend a lot of money to get more. You buy paraphernalia to make using it more fun (or easy). In college you miss class to use it, you skip work. You don't sleep or eat unless you can use it. It is proven that those who use it have lower grades than those who don't.

Now, should the government ban its use? Isn't it something that everyone should have the right to use since they really aren't harming anyone but themselves? Should there be an age of consent when they can use it?

Hmm, different standards for different addictions. Is it alcohol, marijuana, or Xbox. You decide.

Being a Man (personal): There are few times in my life when I have just said, "This is what being a man is all about." I suppose the birth of each of my children and cutting the umbilical cord. The first time I went hunting and got a deer (not counting the one I got with the Suburban). This morning was one of those times though. I was standing on the porch, grilling deer steaks, smoking a cigar, drinking a cup of coffee and listening to Peter Frampton. I rubbed my unshaved face and thought "this is a manly moment". I let out a hardy Tim Allen "Arrr-rrrr-rrr-rrrgh!!" and belched. There was no one there to share in the experience, and that seemed somehow apt.

I am now going to take off all my clothes, grab a club and go screaming into the woods celebrating my manhood. Or, I might shave and do the responsible thing and go to work. That too is manly. Right?

Boy Scouts found! Today a lost group of backpacking Boy Scouts came out of the woods unharmed. The ACLU immediately filed a law suit because they gave thanks to God.

The Bias of the Unbiased: You know how some guys are real sports nuts and can quote statistics like they are reading the financials of an annual report? “Manning has a 92 rating, 93 if he is playing in a city that starts with the letter “N” and it is at night.” The other night I was at a public internet kiosk where guy was rushing in just to see the score of some game. Cool I suppose, everyone has to have a hobby.

I find myself in this same situation however with the polls for the 2008 election. Yes, that event that is still 14 months away. It is always amazing to me how one poll can show a candidate up by a large margin and another shows that same candidate down by the same margin. Sometimes the difference is extreme.

Polls tend to sway people. If you see that your candidate not doing well you might start looking around. Sure, there are a lot of variations to how these polls are conducted and that makes a great difference. For instance, ask people on the street how they are going to vote and you will get one answer, ask registered voters and you will get another. Call people at home during the day you are going to get one slant, at night another. The brilliant minds who do these things know exactly what they are doing and how to best slant the polls.

Two indicators that I watch are www.RealClearPolitics.com and www.rasmussenreports.com. I like Rasmussen because in the last election they seemed to be the most accurate. I really don't care if the candidate that I am endorsing is fairing well of the poll isn't accurate. So for me Rasmussen is the tops. Second is Real Clear Politics. The thing I like about them is they average all of the polls into one. That seems to give a better sampling because you are lumping everyone into a big pot.

But, what I find troubling is that the good people at Real Clear Politics don't seem to be that dedicated to re-indexing their polls on a timely manner. To their credit, it might be one guy in his apartment doing this Matt Drudge style. Time might be limited and they just don't have the time to do this daily. As I look at it now they have the Rasmussen numbers from six days ago. A lot has changed since then. Is it a bias, or is it a lack of time, hard to tell.

All I know is that Thompson got a nice bounce over the weekend and is now back up 5 points over Giuliani. Hillary is currently 12 points over Obama, and starting to slip a little there. Fourteen months to go, this will be interesting!

Web Day! Okay folks, this is September 22, 2007 which is officially Web Day. I am not sure who decided that this was the day to declare, but I am game. As such I thought that I would share my journey to the web.

I played around in the BBS scene prior to the web, and enjoyed sending and receiving e-mail from my dad some thousand miles away the next day. Once he moved closer we exchanged letters via a terrific DOS program called Backmail. I would set up a directory for my dad and in the middle of the night my computer would call his and swap the files. The next morning I would read what he had written to me. It was pretty cool. Unlike the BBS, this was direct connect, and really secure. If I were a terrorist this is certainly the tool I would be using today.

Some years later we moved to Kentucky and our local landline provider announced that they were going to provide Internet access. My dad had been playing with this some and I knew that I would really have fun with it. At 8:01 on the day of enrollment I called, customer #2. Some thirteen years later we still use that provider and we still have that same e-mail address (which they spelled wrong).

We started with Mozilla as was the case with nearly everyone else, and have used many, many different browsers since. Currently we mostly use Firefox.

E-mail was the killer for me in the beginning and it continues to be one of the most important applications for the web. I used Outlook in the beginning and now do 90% of my correspondence through Google's Gmail application, although my address is “work” related.

I have made money on the web through web design, at one time a full time career. I have since moved on from that and look at what people are producing now and am sometimes very impressed, sometimes realized that I could have made a lot of money if I had stayed with it. Oh well, lessons learned.

One of the more recent pleasures from the web has been Apple's iPod. For me this is a true Internet device. It would be totally worthless without the web. I use my iPod to listen to podcsts 95% of the time. Yesterday for instance, I listen to podcasts for about 12 hours (a big travel day). I catch up on tech news, talk shows, etc. Because of this broadcast radio has become totally irrelevant for me. Some of my podcasts are rebroadcast of popular radio shows, but much of what I listen to is produced by guys like me. And, I have enjoyed doing my own podcast show. I am constantly amazed at how many guys are downloading it.

I use Skype to occasionally talk with my folks, MSN Live Messenger to do live video chats with my wife. I regularly blog, maintain a photoblog (www.TheDigitalLife.net), Twitter (http://twitter.com/TheDigitalLife), and surf hours a day. I transmit my business via the web, download my music via the web, and watch a couple of my favorite TV shows via the web. 100% of the news I gather is via the web, and it is a lot more diverse than those yucky days when I just had TV. I rent DVDs via the web, sometimes my coffee via the web (raw beans when I have the money). We order our kids curriculum on the web, and sell it via the same at the end of the year. I search for new people to work with me on the web. I bought my car on the web. We pay our taxes via the web, do our banking on the web.

So thanks to the web, our lives are changed, and mostly for the better. And if you are reading this then your life has now been changed because you know me better. And that is a good thing.

All the News that's Fit to Miss: OJ is now on CNN 24/7, Floyd Landis is stripped of his Tour de France jersey for doping (idiot!), Snoop Dogg guilty on weapons charge, Awkward mini-jihad is in New York with his little puppet Hugo Chavez (the mouth that roared), some kid gets tasered for resisting arrest and will probably get $50m in the soon to be announced law suit, Brittany is finally losing her kids (long time over due), a Saudi company is buying 20% of NASDAQ, Al Gore now says arctic cap totally gone in 23 years (at meeting that costs $25,000 per person), and I am outta here.

A night for the Ladies of the Left: It seems that a few of the more famous leftist ladies made their grand appearances yesterday. First Sally Fields decided to take her best actress Emmy and make an anti-war speech. Another reason I don't watch TV. Then Hillary announced her latest evolution of Hillary-care that will cost the American tax payers (read that everyone except the illegal aliens) a whopping $100B a year. And finally Barry Manilow has said that he won't appear on The View because he disagrees with the opinions of the conservative on the show. He will instead stay home and shave his legs, then resume his tour "Washed up songs from 30 years ago".

Gee I am cranky today!

The Search for Honest Truth: I think that I was just raised differently from most people. My folks taught me not so much to question everything, but that I should verify. This has really become one more of a lifestyle thing for me. I hear things and I kind of scratch my head and wonder what is true and what is not. Sometimes it just sounds so good that it has to be true, sometimes it just sounds too stupid to be true. I learned at a very early age that just because someone says something doesn't always make it true. I was taught, for instance, that when listening to a sermon that I should verify what the preacher says by actually having my Bible and reading it for myself. This is what Martin Luther taught way back when, and what Jim Jones spoke against at Jonestown. The results are that for Luther millions of Christians were set free from the tyranny of the church and for the members of the Peoples Temple they got to drink the Koolaid.

What set this off is two things that happened on the same day this week that caused me to realize how gullible some people are. They just believe something that they are told without considering whether or not that it is true. The first was an e-mail forward from a guy that I sometimes work with. It was for an Amber Alert for some kid in Wisconsin or Idaho. I first thought it odd that he would send this to me since it wasn't someone local, that would have made a little more sense. Then I figured it might be a family member or something like that. Nope, as I started looking at it I realized that it was a forward of a forward of a... you get the idea. Six degrees of separation. Well I spun the name in the Snopes.com search engine as I always do when I get these things and found that it was a total hoax, some kid trying to see how many times it will make it around the globe or something like that. He isn't missing, has been around, and this hoax has been around for a couple of years. Sick really. It makes it all the more difficult for when a true Amber Alert is sent out.

The second one though had an air of truth about it only because it was at first blush difficult to disprove. It was the mysterious plane circling over Washington DC on 9/11/2001 just after the planes hit the Wold Trade Center Towers and the Pentagon. CNN did something on this week (on 9/11/2007) and the blurry zoomed in shot shows that it was the same plane type that the President uses for Air Force One. The conspiracy crowd says that it is a government plane that is controlling all of the jets that are crashing into things, asserting that he government is behind the whole thing. The government doesn't comment. This of course spools up the the conspiracy crowd to a fever pitch.

Sometimes a little common sense can be applied as well. Let's assume that this plane is indeed one of the same planes that are used as Air Force One. Now assume that you are the commander of this plane, or the outfit that oversees them and you have just received confirmation that two planes have attacked New York and another has just hit the Pentagon. You have heard rumors that others might be on the way (in fact Flight 93 was still airborn and off of its flight plan at the same time). Wouldn't one of these planes make a great target? Think about it from the terrorists perspective. You know that at a time such as this the first thing that they are going to do is shuttle off the President into this thing and get him out of there. Right? A terrorist would love that target. And where does this plane sit? Andrews Air Force Base, everyone in the world knows that without looking it up. So as the commander maybe it is a good idea to send one of these planes up to get the communications systems running. While this plane is in the air possibly one of the military heads asks them to give DC a quick flyover to confirm that there are no smoke plumes anywhere. Makes total sense. All of the media outlets are reporting every rumor they can grab.

Now why the government won't confirm anything 6 years later is a bit of a mystery, but I think that there are things we shouldn't have known to the general public. They just need to keep some things secret, it gives us an advantage in dealing with the enemy. But to assume that there is a plane load of people controlling other jets to crash them into buildings to kill thousands of people is insane.

Well all of this got me looking at some of the other 9/11 myths. One in particular had an "expert" on 9/11 who has published a couple of books from his log cabin showing how the building was exploded prior to the collapse. Footage "proved" that the explosions were set off 30 stories below the fire. Then he makes the categorical statement that anyone who says different is a liar and part of the conspiracy. Indeed a true engineering expert shows how the center structure being destroyed would have caused an extra load to the structure and the weight would have caused a collapse many floors below. The building collapsed exactly as it should have due to the fire and damage from the jets. But if you disagree with that scientific evidence you are a liar and a part of the conspiracy...just like me. The problem lies with emotion overtaking reason. If you disagree with the evidence you are considered a traitor to the cause.

There are some things that are not black and white, and there is so much room for conjecture that we just can't know, and may never know. Who shot JFK? There are some 50 different conspiracy theories and all of them can prove there case without a shadow of a doubt, but of course only one can be true. When it comes to faith I made a decision when I was very young to throw out all denominational beliefs built upon the thoughts of man and just stick with the Bible as my sole source of authority. When it comes to everything else I will look at scientific evidence. If I can find a uniform consensus I make my decisions. But, when that scientific evidence is not uniform I have a little more digging to do. And if one of the sides is screaming that we must believe or else we are liars and part of the conspiracy, I have an inkling that this is the guy who is wrong. And I will always welcome the guy who is willing to let me debate his science. He isn't afraid of what I will find.

Rick the Green: I have waffled back and forth for a long time on this green issue. On one side of the argument I agree that we need to take great care of the earth, I feel that it is the mandate that God has given to us. We have been entrusted with this home and we should do the best that we can with it. On the other side I listen to the ranting lunatics who scream that the earth is about to be destroyed by mankind, then get on their private jets and fly to the next location to scream about it again. Guys like Leonardo Di Caprio who have absolutely no scientific background who make movies with terrible science really bug me. I applaud their passion for their beliefs, but the make statements that have no evidence in fact. Gore’s latest statement that New York City will be under water by 2057 is keen. I might be around at that time (albeit very old), and if I am I think I will have a party in Battery Park.

As I have argued this point, I just keep coming back to one simple question again and again, “Where is the science”. There are a few facts that I have been able to determine. First, “greenhouse gases” are here and always have been, although we haven’t always called them that. The radical fringe says that our CO² emissions are what is causing this dramatic increase in heat to our earth. While the fact of the earth rising is still being investigated, and the source not totally agreed upon, the participation of this gas is known. Currently CO² contributes to .036% of the greenhouse gases. While we should certainly do all that we can to not increase this gas which makes up one third of one percent, the greater threat seems to be from methane, and the chief culprit for that is rice fields. Why doesn’t anyone scream about those who eat rice?

I have finally found my place in the environmental movement, and it is with those of a scientific background, who speak of facts, and who live lives that reflect that. Dr. Patrick Moore exemplifies that. Dr. Moore is the co-founder of Greenpeace and uses logical science to prove and disprove those theories so prevalent today. For instance, one of the interviews in Di Caprio’s latest flop movie speaks of the need to stop logging in America because of its harm to the environment. She seems to make sense even if she doesn’t support it with any facts. Wouldn’t we all agree that cutting down forests seems like a bad idea for the environment? But as Dr. Moore explains, logging companies are some of the best things for the eart, and they are very environmentally friendly. When they clear land to harvest timber, they replant new trees. They do it so that they can have another harvest in the future, but the results are new trees. Younger trees are much better at converting CO² through the process of photosynthesis into sugars and new wood. An old tree doesn’t convert as well. So we see that when a forest is replanted it does a much better job of cleaning the air than the old forest. Additionally when a forest is cleared the underbrush and dead wood is cleared. Left alone this causes tremendous potential for forest fires which put out tons and tons of CO^2. Now that makes sense.

As a footnote, I don’t write off all of those in the environmental movement who don’t have a background in science, just those who don’t and don’t live it. I applaud people like activist Ed Begley Jr. who lives the life and encourages others to do so. But Ed walks the walk, and that is someone that I could walk with.

Schumer and Biden Dead Wrong: I find it applauding and disturbing that two high profile senators are already criticizing the Iraq surge report of Gen. David H. Petraeus. Have they been there for the day to day operations? Have they seen the success or failure first hand? They will only accept a negative report because they want us to fail. Only Senator Beard of Washington has had the courage to go there and see first hand, and although a staunch liberal and anti-war advocate, he has said that the surge is working and we need to give it more time. I hate those who only wish for our defeat. This is the course that Democrats want to lead us, and I don't want to be lead in that direction.

Why does this bother me? Well they are attacking the General personally, a man who is know for his integrity (unlike most politicians). Second, the report has yet to be delivered, they are criticizing something that they don't even have yet. They are filled with such overwhelming hatred for the President that they can't see past their ideology.

Kudos to Sean Hannity!: As you all know, I abhor political hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle. I think Vitter (user of prostitutes), Stephens (corruption probe), and Craig (resign, not resign, resign) all need to go. They are embarrassment to the GOP.

But this week he has done an feature on Edwards making millions on the foreclosure of homes in New Orleans, the place where he launched his campaign. And now showing Gore getting off his Gulfstream and climbing into a limo on the way to a speech on Global Warming.

But Bobby Kennedy Jr. has articulated their stand perfectly. When asked about his flying around on a private jet and speaking on global warming he said, "Look, we aren't asking people to change their behavior, we are asking the government to make them change their behavior." Is this not akin to me espousing a view against abortion while allowing my wife to get an abortion, or speaking against gay marriage while trying to pick up men in a bathroom in Minneapolis. Your lifestyle needs to match your views. If you are a tree hugger then you have to have a responsibility to lead by example. This means that you go to speeches on public transportation or a Prius. It is really that simple. You don't charter a jet that cost $7,850 an hour to operate.

Unless you are a multimillionaire liberal.

Return to Sanity: Okay, it has been 48 hours since I have posted about the Apple Touch iPod, and I am now returning to sanity, and thanks so much to Apple for the help. Here is how it went. I was thinking about Apples history of releasing something, and then releasing something totally better in a second generation version. In their newest example with the iPhone, they reduced the price by $200 just 60 days after releasing the product. So I am thinking that the Gen2 of the Touch will be better (say 32GB and 64GB versions) and then since they are giving us SO much more they can keep the price drop. Going to happen? Who knows. But I am willing to wait. My 5G is doing me fine for now.

The Sky is Falling! Okay, I know that I carp about those who scream that hurricanes are going to destroy us all, but this is the worst example of meteorological reporting I have seen yet. Click here. They have a low pressure system over the Atlantic and some guy in New York is giving a worse case scenario that a hurricane is forming and is going to hit New York City. Admittedly, there is a cluster of clouds out there, but there isn't anything that the buffoons at NHC are reporting yet, and they are desperate to justify their jobs with adding as much hype as possible.

Ready to be an early adopter: Tonight Fred Thompson announced he is running for President, North Korea announced the dismantling of its nuclear facilities (kudos to Condi on the one!), Steve Fosset is still missing, and Senator Craig still thinks he isn't gay. But what is on my news radar? Touch me!!!

I cannot tell you how I have wanted this thing since I first heard the rumors. It will set me back probably $100 more than my current 5G, but oh, just look at it. The ONLY thing I don't like is the 16GB storage, but I can live with that. I can't imagine being able to have a widescreen like that. And, Apple is throwing in WiFi to boot! I could be surfing away in bed (instead of this little laptop). Okay, so Christmas is only 110 days away, let's find out how to get this thing in my hands to that I can enjoy it!

What is “Breaking News”: I understand that the business of CNN is to make sure that as many people are viewing their cable station or web pages. That is their business. The make money from advertising that is displayed or viewed. If no one goes to these services then they cannot collect revenue. Pretty basic stuff.

But what has me bugged is that they are sending out these “Breaking News” alerts (yes, I subscribe) for nearly everything, and little of it is “Breaking News”. This morning I got an alert that Hurricane Felix had made landfall in Nicaragua. How is that breaking news? It is a storm that everyone has been tracking for days, it hits a country no where near the US (it is an alert for the US). I am sorry for those in the hurricanes path, but there was plenty of warning to get out of the way. They could have left (as the brilliant Mexicans did the week before) and seen no deaths, or they could sit around blaming their government for not stopping it and not notifying them early enough and experience massive deaths – just like New Orleans.

Now this isn’t about my compassion level (everyone who knows me can share some insight into that) but about a “news” organizations sensationalizing of an event that isn’t breaking news. A building collapsing, a famous person missing, a war. These are things that I would put into the breaking news category. But CNN has to make these incredible alerts for things like the results of the DNA findings for an ex-stripper’s child. Who really cares? It affects me at no level – not even on the entertainment screen. Where is the true, honest, unbiased news organization of today?

Happy Anniversary(s): It was about a week ago that we celebrated the 25th anniversary of the CD, this week we get to celebrate the anniversary (30th) of the Voyager Spacecraft (1&2) which are still spinning through space collecting data and inviting aliens to visit our plant (remember "Starman"?). And this week we also celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Big Mac, quite possibly one of the finest food ever made. I knew that it was a good day when my dad took me out for a Big Mac! Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions, on a sesame seed bun. Five-hundred thirty calories of delight!