It is so bizarre to me the way Christians like to use the decline of Rome as a model of what will happen to America. This website is a perfect example.
Bizarre because what happened just prior to the decline of Rome? The country became Christian.
11.30.2008
11.29.2008
Bird Brains.
Here is a really fascinating interview with a scientist about Bird Intelligence.
Here is an excerpt from one of the more interesting parts:
If some birds are already that intelligent, I wonder how long it would take to evolve into Human like intelligence, assuming they are evolving in that direction.
I would speculate this bird is of roughly equal intelligence as Homo Erectus (gay boner), the species modern Humans evolved from. It took about 2 million years to get from Homo Erectus (gay boner) to modern humans. So, perhaps in 2 million years(or maybe even sooner if something anomalous happens*), we will have birds of human intelligence. Though, I think one big obstacle is the overall size of birds,(small size=small heads=size brains=less room for neurons) but of course birds could get bigger. Perhaps we will have giant, intelligent birds who we share the planet with. Of course, by then Humans will have likely made evolved in interesting ways as well. Also we will probably have introduced genetic enhancements as well as synthetic enhancements, giving us a leg up on our smart bird friends. I wonder what sort of relationships these two species would have. I could see these birds, at some transitional stage, being treated in ways akin to how black people were/are treated (slavery). Well, I guess we already use animals as slaves. I wonder at what point would people see these beings as intelligent enough to be treated as equals. Perhaps by that point in our development our treatment towards animals will have progressed enough in general, that we will have long stopped treated animals as property.
Maybe in 2 million years the earth will be diverse in intelligent species. Dolphins, Birds, Humans. Air, land, and Sea. Perhaps interspecies marriage will be the new gay marriage. And gay marriages and abortions will be required by law. Everyone must have one gay marriage and one abortion at some point in their lives. We will engineer human males with the ability to birth a child, just so they can have abortions.
* "In an absolutely fascinating experiment first reported in July 2002, scientists modified a single mouse gene and created mice with brains 50% larger than normal. This experiment shows that a point mutation can, in fact, have an immense effect on brain size. It is still unknown whether the larger brains make the mice smarter or not, but it is easy to imagine later mutations refining the wiring of these millions of new neurons."
Here is an excerpt from one of the more interesting parts:
LEHRER: What do you think was Alex's(here is an excellent video showing alex talking) most impressive cognitive feat?
PEPPERBERG: The work on the “zero-like” concept. He had shown that he could label the number of a subset of items in a heterogeneous mixture (for example, tell us the number of blue blocks in a mixture of red and blue balls and red and blue blocks), but we hadn't tested his comprehension of number. That task was important, because young children, at a particular stage in number learning, can label a set but can't, for example, remove a specific number of marbles from a big heap.
So we were testing him on number comprehension, again showing him heterogeneous mixtures of different numbers of objects of different colors (for instance, two blue keys, five purple keys, six green keys and asking, "What color is six?"). As was his wont, he was at about 90 percent accuracy on the first dozen or so trials, but we needed far more for statistical significance. The problem was that he just did not want to comply. He began to turn his back to us, throw the objects on the floor, or give us all the wrong answers and repeat the wrong answers so that, statistically, we knew he was avoiding the correct response. We started bribing him with candies and treats to get him to work. One day, in the midst of this, I'm testing him with a tray of three, four and six blocks of different colors, and I ask, "What color three?" He replies, "Five." At first, I was puzzled: there was no set of five on the tray. We repeat this interaction several times, and he consistently says, "Five." Finally, in frustration, I ask, "OK, what color five?" He says "none"! Not only had he transferred the use of "none" from a same-different task, where "none" was the response if nothing about two objects was indeed "same" or "different," to the absence of a numerical set, but he had also figured out how to manipulate me into asking him the question he wanted to answer!
If some birds are already that intelligent, I wonder how long it would take to evolve into Human like intelligence, assuming they are evolving in that direction.
I would speculate this bird is of roughly equal intelligence as Homo Erectus (gay boner), the species modern Humans evolved from. It took about 2 million years to get from Homo Erectus (gay boner) to modern humans. So, perhaps in 2 million years(or maybe even sooner if something anomalous happens*), we will have birds of human intelligence. Though, I think one big obstacle is the overall size of birds,(small size=small heads=size brains=less room for neurons) but of course birds could get bigger. Perhaps we will have giant, intelligent birds who we share the planet with. Of course, by then Humans will have likely made evolved in interesting ways as well. Also we will probably have introduced genetic enhancements as well as synthetic enhancements, giving us a leg up on our smart bird friends. I wonder what sort of relationships these two species would have. I could see these birds, at some transitional stage, being treated in ways akin to how black people were/are treated (slavery). Well, I guess we already use animals as slaves. I wonder at what point would people see these beings as intelligent enough to be treated as equals. Perhaps by that point in our development our treatment towards animals will have progressed enough in general, that we will have long stopped treated animals as property.
Maybe in 2 million years the earth will be diverse in intelligent species. Dolphins, Birds, Humans. Air, land, and Sea. Perhaps interspecies marriage will be the new gay marriage. And gay marriages and abortions will be required by law. Everyone must have one gay marriage and one abortion at some point in their lives. We will engineer human males with the ability to birth a child, just so they can have abortions.
* "In an absolutely fascinating experiment first reported in July 2002, scientists modified a single mouse gene and created mice with brains 50% larger than normal. This experiment shows that a point mutation can, in fact, have an immense effect on brain size. It is still unknown whether the larger brains make the mice smarter or not, but it is easy to imagine later mutations refining the wiring of these millions of new neurons."
11.28.2008
Natural healing.
Lately I have been interested in, and curious to learn more about herbal medicine. Not because of it being a more 'natural' approach to health and wellness, but because of its DIY nature.
I think the increasing interest in things natural is well intentioned but misinformed. People often think of something natural as innocuous or healthy like a tomato or a vitamin, and something synthetic as dangerous or harmful like turpentine or arsenic. Both turpentine and arsenic are naturally occurring products. The deadliest poison on earth, Botulinum toxin, is an 'all natural' product. Three of the most addicting drugs, Tobacco, Opiates, Cocaine, are also natural products.(well, cocaine is extracted from the coca leaf, but the process is very simple. Simple enough it would fit within the guidelines of being considered a 'natural' product if sold at the store)
I don't really have evidence to support this, but I would guess there are more 'natural' products that harm us than help us. And think of all the synthetic products we have which benefit us by counter-acting a 'natural' process. My point being that natural does not=beneficial to humans.
I admit, I do feel personally drawn to nature, and the concept of things being natural. I enjoy products that have as few synthetic qualities as possible. But I do not know if if my appreciation for natural things is anything more than aesthetic.(I don't mean aesthetic to mean strictly appearance, but beauty in general). I suppose because of my culture and past experiences I have positive associations to things natural, and negative associations to things synthetic for a variety of reasons.
We, as humans, are very very young in our development of technology. We are just barely able to understand and predict cause and effect. Because of this, many man-made products that may have initially seemed safe beneficial, turned out to have numerous unintended effects that were harmful. I imagine this has conditioned a certain amount of leeriness in synthetic products. Not that naturally occurring products do not have the same dangers, but they have the benefit of having been easily accessible to man for thousands of years, allowing us to have a better grasp on the long term effects. (of course, this doesn't always hold either, as it has only been recently we realized the harm smoking an cause despite its long history)
Naturally occurring products that are beneficial to us, are beneficial because we evolved with them in a shared environment, and so evolved to make good use of these products in our environment, adjusting our bodies over time maximize the utility of these products while minimizing the harm. But with synthetic products, we have no shared evolution,so many may not be well adapted to the particular, complex needs of our bodies.
There is generally a certain warmth natural products have that synthetics do not. There is an exactness and precision to synthetic products. The 'imperfection' of nature is something I find pleasant and comforting. It is something we associate with life and warmth, while exactness is most often produced by machines, which we associate with cold, unfeeling, lifelessness.
Related to that sense of warmth and life, there is also a sense of spirituality associated with natural products. Since the essence of what is spiritual is related to being alive, only living or once living things are generally thought to possess spiritual qualities. Though, some inorganic, naturally occurring substances are seen by some as having spiritual properties as well. I suppose one distinction may be the perception of a natural product having been produced by God, versus man having produced synthetic products.
I am not saying these are things I necessarily agree with (or disagree with), but just something a part of our culture, that I am imagine has had an influence on my associating natural products with good and synthetic products with bad.
There is also a sense of there being an authenticity to natural products that synthetic products lack. I don't know if there is any inherent lack of authenticity to a product that is synthetic, but I suppose we might tend to associate man made things with having been produced with not pure motives, such as to make as much money as possible, with the least amount of effort.
In truth, everything ever is natural. The only reason we can make anything is by using natural elements and obeying laws of nature. We are a product of nature, so, just as honey made by the honey bee is a product of nature, so is everything made by man.
All of that aside, my interest in herbal medicine does have a small amount to do with those things I wrote about above, but as I said, I am primarily interested in the Do It Yourself nature of herbal medicine. I love the idea of being able to grow and dry my own herbs for healing. Medicine is such a specialized field that leaves the patient at the mercy of doctors. (Which isn't necessarily bad since bodies are so complex, doctors are experts in their field and the average person knows very little about what will help the body best.)
In most fields other than medicine, while it may be nice to have experts we can rely on, there is also room for amateurs, people who have an interest in a field, though not enough to dedicate there lives to it. But nowadays with medicine it is most often illegal for an unauthorized person to deal with drugs, this is where natural medicine comes in.
So, welcome the Christopher Allman Pharmacy! You have back pain? Smoke some of this Opium I grew. Feeling fatigued from all the opium you are smoking? Chew on the these Coca leaves. Now, step into my office (opium den) and tell me how this happened.
This is the greenhouse in my backyard which I will clean out and grow herbs in.
I will would write prescriptions like this:
Put them in boxes like this:
I think the increasing interest in things natural is well intentioned but misinformed. People often think of something natural as innocuous or healthy like a tomato or a vitamin, and something synthetic as dangerous or harmful like turpentine or arsenic. Both turpentine and arsenic are naturally occurring products. The deadliest poison on earth, Botulinum toxin, is an 'all natural' product. Three of the most addicting drugs, Tobacco, Opiates, Cocaine, are also natural products.(well, cocaine is extracted from the coca leaf, but the process is very simple. Simple enough it would fit within the guidelines of being considered a 'natural' product if sold at the store)
I don't really have evidence to support this, but I would guess there are more 'natural' products that harm us than help us. And think of all the synthetic products we have which benefit us by counter-acting a 'natural' process. My point being that natural does not=beneficial to humans.
I admit, I do feel personally drawn to nature, and the concept of things being natural. I enjoy products that have as few synthetic qualities as possible. But I do not know if if my appreciation for natural things is anything more than aesthetic.(I don't mean aesthetic to mean strictly appearance, but beauty in general). I suppose because of my culture and past experiences I have positive associations to things natural, and negative associations to things synthetic for a variety of reasons.
We, as humans, are very very young in our development of technology. We are just barely able to understand and predict cause and effect. Because of this, many man-made products that may have initially seemed safe beneficial, turned out to have numerous unintended effects that were harmful. I imagine this has conditioned a certain amount of leeriness in synthetic products. Not that naturally occurring products do not have the same dangers, but they have the benefit of having been easily accessible to man for thousands of years, allowing us to have a better grasp on the long term effects. (of course, this doesn't always hold either, as it has only been recently we realized the harm smoking an cause despite its long history)
Naturally occurring products that are beneficial to us, are beneficial because we evolved with them in a shared environment, and so evolved to make good use of these products in our environment, adjusting our bodies over time maximize the utility of these products while minimizing the harm. But with synthetic products, we have no shared evolution,so many may not be well adapted to the particular, complex needs of our bodies.
There is generally a certain warmth natural products have that synthetics do not. There is an exactness and precision to synthetic products. The 'imperfection' of nature is something I find pleasant and comforting. It is something we associate with life and warmth, while exactness is most often produced by machines, which we associate with cold, unfeeling, lifelessness.
Related to that sense of warmth and life, there is also a sense of spirituality associated with natural products. Since the essence of what is spiritual is related to being alive, only living or once living things are generally thought to possess spiritual qualities. Though, some inorganic, naturally occurring substances are seen by some as having spiritual properties as well. I suppose one distinction may be the perception of a natural product having been produced by God, versus man having produced synthetic products.
I am not saying these are things I necessarily agree with (or disagree with), but just something a part of our culture, that I am imagine has had an influence on my associating natural products with good and synthetic products with bad.
There is also a sense of there being an authenticity to natural products that synthetic products lack. I don't know if there is any inherent lack of authenticity to a product that is synthetic, but I suppose we might tend to associate man made things with having been produced with not pure motives, such as to make as much money as possible, with the least amount of effort.
In truth, everything ever is natural. The only reason we can make anything is by using natural elements and obeying laws of nature. We are a product of nature, so, just as honey made by the honey bee is a product of nature, so is everything made by man.
All of that aside, my interest in herbal medicine does have a small amount to do with those things I wrote about above, but as I said, I am primarily interested in the Do It Yourself nature of herbal medicine. I love the idea of being able to grow and dry my own herbs for healing. Medicine is such a specialized field that leaves the patient at the mercy of doctors. (Which isn't necessarily bad since bodies are so complex, doctors are experts in their field and the average person knows very little about what will help the body best.)
In most fields other than medicine, while it may be nice to have experts we can rely on, there is also room for amateurs, people who have an interest in a field, though not enough to dedicate there lives to it. But nowadays with medicine it is most often illegal for an unauthorized person to deal with drugs, this is where natural medicine comes in.
So, welcome the Christopher Allman Pharmacy! You have back pain? Smoke some of this Opium I grew. Feeling fatigued from all the opium you are smoking? Chew on the these Coca leaves. Now, step into my office (opium den) and tell me how this happened.
This is the greenhouse in my backyard which I will clean out and grow herbs in.
I will would write prescriptions like this:
Put them in boxes like this:
BND
Perusing the internet I have seen a handful of references to 'Black Friday'. I kept thinking, 'When did people start calling Buy Nothing Day Black Friday?', Then I remembered 'Black Friday' preceded 'Buy Nothing Day by many years. I just checked on wikipedia, and the term Black Friday first appeared in the 1960's, while 'Buy Nothing Day' started in 1992.
I won't have any trouble not buying anything today. Even if I wanted to I could not because I have no $, and I am writing this while being hung on a ✞.
I won't have any trouble not buying anything today. Even if I wanted to I could not because I have no $, and I am writing this while being hung on a ✞.
11.26.2008
Advertisement
Even though I recently put an icon on my blog proclaiming it to be ad-free I am now posting an ad! This ad is for Simple Shoes, a company I support, so do not feel bad promoting.
Why am I promoting Simple Shoes? I can't remember. I am joking. If A person posts one of two videos on their site they are entered to win a free pair of Simple Shoes.
Their shoes are cool and their bags too. By cool I mean well designed and environmentally friendly. Below are both videos. I don't care at all if anyone watches them, but them being here might win me a free pair of shoes. I realize it is so gimmicky of Simple Shoes asking people to post their video for the remote possibility of winning a shoe, and maybe I seem like such a sucker for having fallen for it, but since I do support the company, I guess I don't mind. And all my current shoes are old and crumbly.
Why am I promoting Simple Shoes? I can't remember. I am joking. If A person posts one of two videos on their site they are entered to win a free pair of Simple Shoes.
Their shoes are cool and their bags too. By cool I mean well designed and environmentally friendly. Below are both videos. I don't care at all if anyone watches them, but them being here might win me a free pair of shoes. I realize it is so gimmicky of Simple Shoes asking people to post their video for the remote possibility of winning a shoe, and maybe I seem like such a sucker for having fallen for it, but since I do support the company, I guess I don't mind. And all my current shoes are old and crumbly.
11.23.2008
$$$$
The more I think about the financial crisis the more I don't care.
On one hand, I realize that whenever there are economic difficulties, those who generally bare the brunt of the turmoil, are those who already struggle. I realize that financial difficulties can lead to deeper problems. Barely being able to get by, and particularly Unemployment can lead to depression, straining relationships and families. That is something unfortunate, and I feel a sense of compassion to those who struggle. But I am glad we live in a country that offers assistance in a variety of ways to struggling families and individuals. I hope with the leftward shift our government has taken, more assistance will allotted to those in need, rather than to those in power.
All that aside, there are so many worse things that can happen than not having a lot of money. The large majority of people won't lose there jobs or receive wage cuts that seriously alter their cost of living. For most people the most this economic downturn will meet a slight decrease ability to be a consumer. (of course, hard economic times can lead to budget cuts for things like schools and libraries, but hopefully our new administration will take more a of a 'New Deal' approach and increase spending to stimulate the $ world)
Even for those who do lose there job, while it can cause strain and stress, it may not always be negative in its ultimate consequences. I remember my dad lost the job he had held for almost 20 years, and wasn't able to find an adequate replacement for almost 2 more. Times were tough for a while. (Well, I guess they were. I can't remember anything being at all different about the way we lived. I was 15-17). The Job he eventually got at the Post Office was much better than the job he had before. Working less hours for more pay in a better environment.
I don't think that all job losses will end up with a silver lining, some people will never be able to find work equal to what they had before. But for most people, things will even out, and for some even improve.
For the average person, whose life might be effected by having to cut back somewhat, I can't help but think: 'so what' or even 'good'. I wrote before about how an increase in choices does not create an increase in happiness, and can even lead to a decrease. We all know we are a nation obsessed with consumerism. When times are good, we have news reports praising our economy and spending, and others criticizing our high levels of consumer debt and materialism. It is almost as if there is a partition in the mass mind. There is a sense of wanting people to shop a lot and support industry, yet do it without being materialistic or in debt.
When of the cutbacks people will have to make, I don't see this is a 'crisis', or something that concerns me. Economies are always up and down. People are often going in and out of jobs. When I think of all the corporate executives not getting their bonuses this year, I don't know if anyone really cares but the executives and their families.
So, yeah, we might be in a crisis, but the crisis is one of being so attached to $ and products we think our lessened ability to live excessively really matters.
Of course, I might feel different if this economic instability led to an actual economic depression, or if I was being personally effected, but I was listening to some interviews conducted in the 50's with people who had lived through the depression. There seemed to be in most of them, while not explicitly stated this way, a sense not unlike gratitude for having gone through a period of extreme lack. It taught them a sense of appreciation for what they do have, and an repulsion to over indulgence. Perhaps times of economic turmoil can be ultimately beneficial for the nation's psyche.
On one hand, I realize that whenever there are economic difficulties, those who generally bare the brunt of the turmoil, are those who already struggle. I realize that financial difficulties can lead to deeper problems. Barely being able to get by, and particularly Unemployment can lead to depression, straining relationships and families. That is something unfortunate, and I feel a sense of compassion to those who struggle. But I am glad we live in a country that offers assistance in a variety of ways to struggling families and individuals. I hope with the leftward shift our government has taken, more assistance will allotted to those in need, rather than to those in power.
All that aside, there are so many worse things that can happen than not having a lot of money. The large majority of people won't lose there jobs or receive wage cuts that seriously alter their cost of living. For most people the most this economic downturn will meet a slight decrease ability to be a consumer. (of course, hard economic times can lead to budget cuts for things like schools and libraries, but hopefully our new administration will take more a of a 'New Deal' approach and increase spending to stimulate the $ world)
Even for those who do lose there job, while it can cause strain and stress, it may not always be negative in its ultimate consequences. I remember my dad lost the job he had held for almost 20 years, and wasn't able to find an adequate replacement for almost 2 more. Times were tough for a while. (Well, I guess they were. I can't remember anything being at all different about the way we lived. I was 15-17). The Job he eventually got at the Post Office was much better than the job he had before. Working less hours for more pay in a better environment.
I don't think that all job losses will end up with a silver lining, some people will never be able to find work equal to what they had before. But for most people, things will even out, and for some even improve.
For the average person, whose life might be effected by having to cut back somewhat, I can't help but think: 'so what' or even 'good'. I wrote before about how an increase in choices does not create an increase in happiness, and can even lead to a decrease. We all know we are a nation obsessed with consumerism. When times are good, we have news reports praising our economy and spending, and others criticizing our high levels of consumer debt and materialism. It is almost as if there is a partition in the mass mind. There is a sense of wanting people to shop a lot and support industry, yet do it without being materialistic or in debt.
When of the cutbacks people will have to make, I don't see this is a 'crisis', or something that concerns me. Economies are always up and down. People are often going in and out of jobs. When I think of all the corporate executives not getting their bonuses this year, I don't know if anyone really cares but the executives and their families.
So, yeah, we might be in a crisis, but the crisis is one of being so attached to $ and products we think our lessened ability to live excessively really matters.
Of course, I might feel different if this economic instability led to an actual economic depression, or if I was being personally effected, but I was listening to some interviews conducted in the 50's with people who had lived through the depression. There seemed to be in most of them, while not explicitly stated this way, a sense not unlike gratitude for having gone through a period of extreme lack. It taught them a sense of appreciation for what they do have, and an repulsion to over indulgence. Perhaps times of economic turmoil can be ultimately beneficial for the nation's psyche.
11.19.2008
Interesting animals.
I have come across three interesting animals recently.
Remember that entry I posted about the real life furby?
That one is from the sea. But there is another real life furby, that was thought to be extinct, and was just re-discovered(oh funny! i did an image search for 'real life furby' trying to find this picture and the ninth picture was ofme! No joke! It is the picture I have of myself on my blog, I assume because of my real life furby entry.:
This next animal is extinct. It is called a Chalicotherium. It is an early mammal, and a proto-primate. I think it is so cool. It is easy to see how it is related to things like horses and giraffes, but is an evolutionary step towards being a full primate like a gorilla. It almost looks like it could be some alien intelligent species.
I just looked it up, to make sure I had the name right, and came across a different artist rendition. Since this animal extinct, obviously there are some uncertainties about its appearance. I think seeing a variety of artist interpretations can help one have a more full understanding of the species. Like reading a variety of translations of a particular text. Since none will be exact, reading several, is like drawing a hole around the thing you want to describe, but cannot name.
And here is my artist rendering:
The final animal is not extinct. But looks like it should be. And if I have my way it soon will be.
It is called the Okapi!!!!!
Someone needs to show this to Kirk Cameron, who beleives that because there are not animals transitional looking animals like the 'crocoduck' evolution cannot be true. Although he concedes there is one animal, the duckbilled platypus, fitting his criteria, he then says it is that way because it is just how God created it. Which is pretty unfair of him. He sets up a criteria for proving evolution true, then acknowledges that criteria has been met, but still doesn't allow it to be evidence for evolution.
Here is a video of Kirk doing this:
Perhaps someone need show him the Okapi, because it fits his criteria of a'transitional' animal, that is supposedly what we would see if evolution were true. Even though of course, it won't persuade him. (even if there were not animals like the duck billed platypus or the Okapi, I think evidence for evolution solid for very different reasons. The criteria he sets up of what the world would look like if evolution were true, comes from a misunderstanding of evolution. I don't think any scientists who understands evolution expects to find a 'crocoduck'. Even though the world does actually, on rare occasion, look the way he thinks evolution requires, it is because of a fluke, and not because of a requirement of evolution)
Here is another view of the Okapi I just found, which surprised me, because I had been under the impression that the Okapi was about the size of pony.
Remember that entry I posted about the real life furby?
That one is from the sea. But there is another real life furby, that was thought to be extinct, and was just re-discovered(oh funny! i did an image search for 'real life furby' trying to find this picture and the ninth picture was ofme! No joke! It is the picture I have of myself on my blog, I assume because of my real life furby entry.:
This next animal is extinct. It is called a Chalicotherium. It is an early mammal, and a proto-primate. I think it is so cool. It is easy to see how it is related to things like horses and giraffes, but is an evolutionary step towards being a full primate like a gorilla. It almost looks like it could be some alien intelligent species.
I just looked it up, to make sure I had the name right, and came across a different artist rendition. Since this animal extinct, obviously there are some uncertainties about its appearance. I think seeing a variety of artist interpretations can help one have a more full understanding of the species. Like reading a variety of translations of a particular text. Since none will be exact, reading several, is like drawing a hole around the thing you want to describe, but cannot name.
And here is my artist rendering:
The final animal is not extinct. But looks like it should be. And if I have my way it soon will be.
It is called the Okapi!!!!!
Someone needs to show this to Kirk Cameron, who beleives that because there are not animals transitional looking animals like the 'crocoduck' evolution cannot be true. Although he concedes there is one animal, the duckbilled platypus, fitting his criteria, he then says it is that way because it is just how God created it. Which is pretty unfair of him. He sets up a criteria for proving evolution true, then acknowledges that criteria has been met, but still doesn't allow it to be evidence for evolution.
Here is a video of Kirk doing this:
Perhaps someone need show him the Okapi, because it fits his criteria of a'transitional' animal, that is supposedly what we would see if evolution were true. Even though of course, it won't persuade him. (even if there were not animals like the duck billed platypus or the Okapi, I think evidence for evolution solid for very different reasons. The criteria he sets up of what the world would look like if evolution were true, comes from a misunderstanding of evolution. I don't think any scientists who understands evolution expects to find a 'crocoduck'. Even though the world does actually, on rare occasion, look the way he thinks evolution requires, it is because of a fluke, and not because of a requirement of evolution)
Here is another view of the Okapi I just found, which surprised me, because I had been under the impression that the Okapi was about the size of pony.
11.16.2008
more prayer flags
I have started researching various wedding customs. it seems like there ought to be something more beautiful and interesting than the traditional western wedding.
These are words to a song I like, that I am listening to right now, as I surf the internet and write in my blog:
Listen to me get off the internet
We are the ones who are alive right now so lets start living
We're obsessed with freedom and living easy lives
but what use is an easy life hungry and blind
The hallow cold, the crawling-hunting,
indulging your weakest parts and still you're hungry
Why not wake the fuck up and smell the air outside
and do a little real work and come back to life
Clean out the fridge, take out the garbage,
sweep the floor, open the doors and windows
read the news, shut up about music
ask a stupid question, stop feeling too ignorant
This is the one world where we live curious and busy,
As the world is ending can I survive this cold dawn
At least I can sit here in the street exhaling and strong
Clean up the mess, get off the internet
We are the ones who are alive right now so lets start living.
here are more pictures of prayer flags:
These are words to a song I like, that I am listening to right now, as I surf the internet and write in my blog:
Listen to me get off the internet
We are the ones who are alive right now so lets start living
We're obsessed with freedom and living easy lives
but what use is an easy life hungry and blind
The hallow cold, the crawling-hunting,
indulging your weakest parts and still you're hungry
Why not wake the fuck up and smell the air outside
and do a little real work and come back to life
Clean out the fridge, take out the garbage,
sweep the floor, open the doors and windows
read the news, shut up about music
ask a stupid question, stop feeling too ignorant
This is the one world where we live curious and busy,
As the world is ending can I survive this cold dawn
At least I can sit here in the street exhaling and strong
Clean up the mess, get off the internet
We are the ones who are alive right now so lets start living.
here are more pictures of prayer flags:
11.13.2008
Post prop 8. Collective personality disorders
It is strange, almost surreal to see how the Church and Church members are responding the the backlash against them since prop 8 has passed.
Many people are frustrated and hurt by the passing of prop 8 and, understandably, wanting a place to direct their emotions. People want to respond to this injustice, and see the Lds Church as an appropriate direction for protest because of their key role in the pro prop 8 movement.
Yet the Church and Church members have adopted this sense of perplexed victimization. As if they are being arbitrarily and unfairly singled out, revealing it is actually they who are the targets of persecution and bigotry, rather than the source of it.
I think a perfect example of this is illustrated by this Facebook group.
It contains a list of 12 things, such as "Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6% of the Yes vote and 2.4% of the total Proposition 8 vote." Trying to show the unfairness of singling out the Lds Church, because they were actually just a small part of the pro prop 8 movement. One very crucial item left off of that list is that it is estimated that Lds Church Members provided 70% of the private money donated to the pro prop 8 movement, and these donations came in response to The Church as an organization asking its members to contribute. They also asked members in California to go door to door and place phone calls encouraging neighbors to vote yes on Prop 8.
Just before the election, there seemed to be a sense of pride among the Church and Church members for their ability to lead the Prop 8 Movement despite representing a small percentage of the population. It strikes me as extremely disingenuous for them to now act as if recognizing and responding to the major role they, above any other one group, played with prop 8 is unfair, as if they hadn't actually led the fight to ban homosexual's from marrying.
Also strange and surreal, is how the Church, and Church members, act as if them being picketed represents bigotry and persecution. To be sure, there have been a handful of violent acts, such as chapels having their windows broken, and such actions are obviously dumb and unhelpful and only represent a tiny handful of individuals, but by and large, this backlash against the Church has been by means of peaceful protests, petitions, websites etc.. For a group to spend an enormous amount of time and energy engaging in a particular behavior, then when succeeding to of those they protested against use those same actions against them, and call it persecution is bizarre.
These protesters are not asking that Lds people have their rights limited, they are not asking for a ban on Lds marriages, they are protesting the Church's having limited their rights(though some are asking for the Church's tax exempt status to be removed, which. Though I disagree with the stance the Church took, I do believe it was within their rights as a religion and should not affect their tax status).
On the Church's website, in regards to this controversy they wrote "No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information. It is important to understand that this issue for the Church has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage— a union between a man and a woman. Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the Church were and are simply wrong."
As my brother wisely pointed out, this statement contradicts itself. It begins by saying, no one should be vilified. Then says marriage between a man and woman is divine That is vilification. It vilifies their opposition to say their position is divine. Implication: the alternative is not divine, but from Satan.
For them to claim that allegations of bigotry or persecution are wrong, is misunderstanding what persecution and bigotry mean. Again, as my brother pointed out bigotry means: "obstinately convinced of the superiority of their opinions". When you say your beliefs are divine, and the oppositions are not, and then spend enormous amounts of time and money advocating legislation which enforces that belief this clearly fits that definition.
It does not matter how much they emphasize their love for homosexuals as individuals. It does not matter if they feel no animosity or dislike for particular homosexuals, to vilify their position and deny them rights is bigotry and persecution. I don't believe most Mormons or the leaders, are personally bigoted against homosexuals, and in recent years the Church has shown improvement by encouraging members to be compassionate to the circumstance of homosexual individuals. But saying something like, 'I don't have anything against Xgroup of people', does not make their desire to deny them certain rights any less. No matter how much a person may say they have nothing against black people, if they also act to deny black people equal treatment, it doesn't do much good. Some people seem to think that adding they don't have anything against a particular group, then makes it okay for them to deny same group rights, but it is the rights which matter most. The important thing about being seen with compassion, is what it leads to, so acknowledging a compassion while rejecting what it should lead to falls short. Much like the concept, 'faith without works is dead', 'acceptance' without equal treatment is dead.
Imagine if a group tried to deny Lds people to marry as they desired. No matter how often they said they had nothing against Mormon's personally, for them to deny them the right to practice their beliefs would be perceived as persecution.
Of course, and what makes this situation so ironic, is that the example above isn't hypothetical. There was once a time when people tried to deny Lds people to marry how they believed(the obvious example of plurual marriage, but there was once even an effort made in 1870 to pass legislation to make any Mormon marriage invalid.) Many of the exact same arguments being by the Church against homosexual marriage, were those used against the Church. People appealed to tradition. People said that by allowing marriage to be something different than a Union between one man and one woman, it threatened the institution of marriage. At that time, the Church Brigham Young responded with many of the same defenses that advocates of gay marriage are using. And of course, the Church saw this opposition as bigotry and persecution. Now, when they are the aggressor, it is only seen as standing up for their beliefs. Even when their is a backlash, and protests, people upset about having their rights taken away, the Church again sees even this as persecution and bigotry. Apparently, according to the Church, fighting to deny a group their rights is not persecution, unless that group is Mormons. When this type of behavior comes from an individual, that person is said to suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder. I wonder if a group can collectively suffer from a psychological disorder.
Of course, the Church and Church members have a certain affinity for seeing themselves as victims of persecution. Opposition is seen as emphasizing the truthfulness of the Church. To quote what someone wrote on the Facebook group I linked above: "the LDS church being attacked is just more proof that this is the true church of Jesus Christ. Satan wouldn't focus all his energy on it if it weren't for a reason." If Lds people were to really follow through with this reasoning, they should convert to Scientology, a group far more persecuted against than Mormons. Or if persecution were an indication of truthfulness, should we then take that to indicate the goodness of gay marriage because "satan wouldn't focus all his energy on it if it weren't for a reason"?
Many people are frustrated and hurt by the passing of prop 8 and, understandably, wanting a place to direct their emotions. People want to respond to this injustice, and see the Lds Church as an appropriate direction for protest because of their key role in the pro prop 8 movement.
Yet the Church and Church members have adopted this sense of perplexed victimization. As if they are being arbitrarily and unfairly singled out, revealing it is actually they who are the targets of persecution and bigotry, rather than the source of it.
I think a perfect example of this is illustrated by this Facebook group.
It contains a list of 12 things, such as "Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6% of the Yes vote and 2.4% of the total Proposition 8 vote." Trying to show the unfairness of singling out the Lds Church, because they were actually just a small part of the pro prop 8 movement. One very crucial item left off of that list is that it is estimated that Lds Church Members provided 70% of the private money donated to the pro prop 8 movement, and these donations came in response to The Church as an organization asking its members to contribute. They also asked members in California to go door to door and place phone calls encouraging neighbors to vote yes on Prop 8.
Just before the election, there seemed to be a sense of pride among the Church and Church members for their ability to lead the Prop 8 Movement despite representing a small percentage of the population. It strikes me as extremely disingenuous for them to now act as if recognizing and responding to the major role they, above any other one group, played with prop 8 is unfair, as if they hadn't actually led the fight to ban homosexual's from marrying.
Also strange and surreal, is how the Church, and Church members, act as if them being picketed represents bigotry and persecution. To be sure, there have been a handful of violent acts, such as chapels having their windows broken, and such actions are obviously dumb and unhelpful and only represent a tiny handful of individuals, but by and large, this backlash against the Church has been by means of peaceful protests, petitions, websites etc.. For a group to spend an enormous amount of time and energy engaging in a particular behavior, then when succeeding to of those they protested against use those same actions against them, and call it persecution is bizarre.
These protesters are not asking that Lds people have their rights limited, they are not asking for a ban on Lds marriages, they are protesting the Church's having limited their rights(though some are asking for the Church's tax exempt status to be removed, which. Though I disagree with the stance the Church took, I do believe it was within their rights as a religion and should not affect their tax status).
On the Church's website, in regards to this controversy they wrote "No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information. It is important to understand that this issue for the Church has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage— a union between a man and a woman. Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the Church were and are simply wrong."
As my brother wisely pointed out, this statement contradicts itself. It begins by saying, no one should be vilified. Then says marriage between a man and woman is divine That is vilification. It vilifies their opposition to say their position is divine. Implication: the alternative is not divine, but from Satan.
For them to claim that allegations of bigotry or persecution are wrong, is misunderstanding what persecution and bigotry mean. Again, as my brother pointed out bigotry means: "obstinately convinced of the superiority of their opinions". When you say your beliefs are divine, and the oppositions are not, and then spend enormous amounts of time and money advocating legislation which enforces that belief this clearly fits that definition.
It does not matter how much they emphasize their love for homosexuals as individuals. It does not matter if they feel no animosity or dislike for particular homosexuals, to vilify their position and deny them rights is bigotry and persecution. I don't believe most Mormons or the leaders, are personally bigoted against homosexuals, and in recent years the Church has shown improvement by encouraging members to be compassionate to the circumstance of homosexual individuals. But saying something like, 'I don't have anything against Xgroup of people', does not make their desire to deny them certain rights any less. No matter how much a person may say they have nothing against black people, if they also act to deny black people equal treatment, it doesn't do much good. Some people seem to think that adding they don't have anything against a particular group, then makes it okay for them to deny same group rights, but it is the rights which matter most. The important thing about being seen with compassion, is what it leads to, so acknowledging a compassion while rejecting what it should lead to falls short. Much like the concept, 'faith without works is dead', 'acceptance' without equal treatment is dead.
Imagine if a group tried to deny Lds people to marry as they desired. No matter how often they said they had nothing against Mormon's personally, for them to deny them the right to practice their beliefs would be perceived as persecution.
Of course, and what makes this situation so ironic, is that the example above isn't hypothetical. There was once a time when people tried to deny Lds people to marry how they believed(the obvious example of plurual marriage, but there was once even an effort made in 1870 to pass legislation to make any Mormon marriage invalid.) Many of the exact same arguments being by the Church against homosexual marriage, were those used against the Church. People appealed to tradition. People said that by allowing marriage to be something different than a Union between one man and one woman, it threatened the institution of marriage. At that time, the Church Brigham Young responded with many of the same defenses that advocates of gay marriage are using. And of course, the Church saw this opposition as bigotry and persecution. Now, when they are the aggressor, it is only seen as standing up for their beliefs. Even when their is a backlash, and protests, people upset about having their rights taken away, the Church again sees even this as persecution and bigotry. Apparently, according to the Church, fighting to deny a group their rights is not persecution, unless that group is Mormons. When this type of behavior comes from an individual, that person is said to suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder. I wonder if a group can collectively suffer from a psychological disorder.
Of course, the Church and Church members have a certain affinity for seeing themselves as victims of persecution. Opposition is seen as emphasizing the truthfulness of the Church. To quote what someone wrote on the Facebook group I linked above: "the LDS church being attacked is just more proof that this is the true church of Jesus Christ. Satan wouldn't focus all his energy on it if it weren't for a reason." If Lds people were to really follow through with this reasoning, they should convert to Scientology, a group far more persecuted against than Mormons. Or if persecution were an indication of truthfulness, should we then take that to indicate the goodness of gay marriage because "satan wouldn't focus all his energy on it if it weren't for a reason"?
11.04.2008
Visualizing compassion.
As I have gotten caught up in the strong emotions surrounding the presidential election, I have found myself feeling somewhat disturbed by the intensity of my negative emotions toward the right-wing. I have been feeling things like 'only a retard or an ass-hole could possibly be a Republican'.
That is what comes from the emotional part of my body. But the rational part of me recognizes it is not true. I know there are kind-hearted and intelligent people who desire many of the same things for our country as I, but disagree on how those things can be achieved. And even those who aren't intelligent and kind-hearted, or desire things for our country I believe to be bad, my feeling negative towards them doesn't help them or I.
(The debate I had with Jon Wells, the kid I knew in high school, as well as those on the pro-prop 8 Facebook group has, perhaps, given me an unfairly negative sense of the character and reasoning people use to support their right-wing tendencies. As well as watching clips online of people like Bill O'Reilly. My body is generalizing from these few individuals to an entire group of people.)
I think we are all familiar with being able to recognize something with the parts of our mind associated with reason, yet not be able feel it with our emotional mind, even if we want to.
I don't like the feeling so poorly of a group of people or towards particular individuals, especially when I know my feelings are a distorted stereo-type. When our emotions become high, particularly in negative, angry ways, it clouds our judgment, making it difficult to recognize when we are wrong. It creates within us a sense of superiority, indignation and barriers between ourselves and others. These are all things I want to avoid. And of course it is difficult to feel peaceful and calm while feeling negative about others.
Ever since I had that powerful experience doing visualization meditation, I have been doing visualizations regularly, and experimenting with a variety of techniques (while I haven't yet had as intense of an experience as the first time, it has always been very powerful and euphoric).
One thing I have been trying is to imagine positive emotions, energy, love, and compassion towards those who may evoke feelings of frustration within me, such as a certain mom(not mine) who is constantly putting me down. I have found this to be very effective. I imagine this positive energy flowing from me to them, until I then genuinely feel positively and compassionately towards that person. The feelings then remains with me throughout the day, or if I feel the negative feelings returning, it only takes a little effort and time using visualization to bring the positive feelings back. I have found this not only works for other people, but things as well. If there is something annoying me while meditating, such as an itch on my body, or construction banging outside, I imagine feeling positively towards that disturbance, until I then develop genuine positive feelings.
Today it occurred to me I could try this technique towards the entire right wing and hopefully overcome the negativity I want to free myself from. (well, what my imagination has created for me as the stereotype of the right wing.) I tried it and found it worked well. It is a little more difficult to try and imagine a group of people, most of whom I don't even know, but it proved effective. I now feel much more compassion towards these people. I still struggle understanding how people can believe certain things, and be so inconsistent in their thinking, and I still very much disagree with them but overall, I have found myself being able to empathy and compassion towards this imaginary group of people, and the people who aren't imaginary like Jon Wells and Bill O'Reilly. I am happy about this. I feel a greater peace and calmness returning to me that had lessened over the past little while.
The first polls are just now closing. Fingers crossed. Crossing myself like a Catholic. Nailing myself to a cross.
Here are a couple photos I took in my yard in Olympia. The first few are of the chicken coop in my back yard that I am returning into a Tea Room. The first photos were taken when I very first opened it up, and discovered vines, a tree, rotted wood and old chicken coop things. Then after I cleared some vines away and removed the coop things. Then a photo of it partway through the renovation. It is a lot further along now, but I don't have a more recent photo. The work has been going slow, because when I am not at school I am usually working on my show, doing homework, or talking to Marissa(hi Marissa♥). After the tea room photos are photos taken in my yard on a foggy morning. Almost every morning is foggy because we live in a marsh.
That is what comes from the emotional part of my body. But the rational part of me recognizes it is not true. I know there are kind-hearted and intelligent people who desire many of the same things for our country as I, but disagree on how those things can be achieved. And even those who aren't intelligent and kind-hearted, or desire things for our country I believe to be bad, my feeling negative towards them doesn't help them or I.
(The debate I had with Jon Wells, the kid I knew in high school, as well as those on the pro-prop 8 Facebook group has, perhaps, given me an unfairly negative sense of the character and reasoning people use to support their right-wing tendencies. As well as watching clips online of people like Bill O'Reilly. My body is generalizing from these few individuals to an entire group of people.)
I think we are all familiar with being able to recognize something with the parts of our mind associated with reason, yet not be able feel it with our emotional mind, even if we want to.
I don't like the feeling so poorly of a group of people or towards particular individuals, especially when I know my feelings are a distorted stereo-type. When our emotions become high, particularly in negative, angry ways, it clouds our judgment, making it difficult to recognize when we are wrong. It creates within us a sense of superiority, indignation and barriers between ourselves and others. These are all things I want to avoid. And of course it is difficult to feel peaceful and calm while feeling negative about others.
Ever since I had that powerful experience doing visualization meditation, I have been doing visualizations regularly, and experimenting with a variety of techniques (while I haven't yet had as intense of an experience as the first time, it has always been very powerful and euphoric).
One thing I have been trying is to imagine positive emotions, energy, love, and compassion towards those who may evoke feelings of frustration within me, such as a certain mom(not mine) who is constantly putting me down. I have found this to be very effective. I imagine this positive energy flowing from me to them, until I then genuinely feel positively and compassionately towards that person. The feelings then remains with me throughout the day, or if I feel the negative feelings returning, it only takes a little effort and time using visualization to bring the positive feelings back. I have found this not only works for other people, but things as well. If there is something annoying me while meditating, such as an itch on my body, or construction banging outside, I imagine feeling positively towards that disturbance, until I then develop genuine positive feelings.
Today it occurred to me I could try this technique towards the entire right wing and hopefully overcome the negativity I want to free myself from. (well, what my imagination has created for me as the stereotype of the right wing.) I tried it and found it worked well. It is a little more difficult to try and imagine a group of people, most of whom I don't even know, but it proved effective. I now feel much more compassion towards these people. I still struggle understanding how people can believe certain things, and be so inconsistent in their thinking, and I still very much disagree with them but overall, I have found myself being able to empathy and compassion towards this imaginary group of people, and the people who aren't imaginary like Jon Wells and Bill O'Reilly. I am happy about this. I feel a greater peace and calmness returning to me that had lessened over the past little while.
The first polls are just now closing. Fingers crossed. Crossing myself like a Catholic. Nailing myself to a cross.
Here are a couple photos I took in my yard in Olympia. The first few are of the chicken coop in my back yard that I am returning into a Tea Room. The first photos were taken when I very first opened it up, and discovered vines, a tree, rotted wood and old chicken coop things. Then after I cleared some vines away and removed the coop things. Then a photo of it partway through the renovation. It is a lot further along now, but I don't have a more recent photo. The work has been going slow, because when I am not at school I am usually working on my show, doing homework, or talking to Marissa(hi Marissa♥). After the tea room photos are photos taken in my yard on a foggy morning. Almost every morning is foggy because we live in a marsh.
flip flop
I keep pulling John Kerrys. I go back and forth between excitement and nervousness about today. I will read a news article about Obama being 11 points ahead in the polls and feel so excited, then hear on NPR him being ahead by only 6 points and feel nervous. I also read, just this morning, that in 2000 Al Gore was behind 7 points in pre-election polls and, as we remember, won the popular vote. This made me particularly nervous.
On one hand I am excited to finally know who our president will be, but I think I will miss the election fever. I enjoy the way election time gets everyone talking about issues that are sort of important. I enjoy the weird debates I get in with old friends from high school who ask if I hate America, and when I say no he tells me Obama does, when I ask what his evidence is he says a bunch of stuff about socialism, when I ask him to remind me how that has anything to do with hating America he then shifts to Obama not having worn an American flag lapel pin. I ask if he wears an American flag lapel pin. He then changes tactics again. I will honestly miss weird stuff like that.
I will be excited to no longer hear rants against the Bush administration. While I generally agree with everything these ranters are saying, they never say anything new, yet speak as if they are saying something incredibly profound. I won't miss at least one caller per episode on every Npr show that takes call going off on a rant against the Bush administration, no matter how loosely related their rant is to the shows topic. I wonder what these callers say to the screeners. Do they make up a fake question? Or do they tell them, 'I'm just going to go on rant about the Bush administration until the host finally says that I need to ask a question because they are short on time'
'Dear God, Please bless that Barack Obama will win the election today, your friend on earth, Christopher' I prayed this morning.
I am hoping that God values my prayers more than all the Christians praying for John Mccain. And that the new electronic voting booths are susceptible to his holy spirit, creating divine election fraud on my behalf. If all my prayers are answered I should also be expecting a free pizza any minute now....
But to be honest, I did pray this morning that Barack Obama would win the election. Then I thought, wait, what am I doing? For the reasons I joked about above. Supposing prayer really works, and supposing Obama would otherwise lose, yet God wanted to pay special attention to my prayer above others, what would be done? Divine fraud?
But man oh man! I started crying again thinking about the possibility of Mccain winning.
'Dear God, why hasn't my free pizza arrived? Your friend online, Christopher'
On one hand I am excited to finally know who our president will be, but I think I will miss the election fever. I enjoy the way election time gets everyone talking about issues that are sort of important. I enjoy the weird debates I get in with old friends from high school who ask if I hate America, and when I say no he tells me Obama does, when I ask what his evidence is he says a bunch of stuff about socialism, when I ask him to remind me how that has anything to do with hating America he then shifts to Obama not having worn an American flag lapel pin. I ask if he wears an American flag lapel pin. He then changes tactics again. I will honestly miss weird stuff like that.
I will be excited to no longer hear rants against the Bush administration. While I generally agree with everything these ranters are saying, they never say anything new, yet speak as if they are saying something incredibly profound. I won't miss at least one caller per episode on every Npr show that takes call going off on a rant against the Bush administration, no matter how loosely related their rant is to the shows topic. I wonder what these callers say to the screeners. Do they make up a fake question? Or do they tell them, 'I'm just going to go on rant about the Bush administration until the host finally says that I need to ask a question because they are short on time'
'Dear God, Please bless that Barack Obama will win the election today, your friend on earth, Christopher' I prayed this morning.
I am hoping that God values my prayers more than all the Christians praying for John Mccain. And that the new electronic voting booths are susceptible to his holy spirit, creating divine election fraud on my behalf. If all my prayers are answered I should also be expecting a free pizza any minute now....
But to be honest, I did pray this morning that Barack Obama would win the election. Then I thought, wait, what am I doing? For the reasons I joked about above. Supposing prayer really works, and supposing Obama would otherwise lose, yet God wanted to pay special attention to my prayer above others, what would be done? Divine fraud?
But man oh man! I started crying again thinking about the possibility of Mccain winning.
'Dear God, why hasn't my free pizza arrived? Your friend online, Christopher'
11.02.2008
Halloween. Sleep scatting
This is a picture from my sister-in-laws blog.(i guess it is also my brothers, my I think my sister-in-law, Carie, does all or most the writing in it)
I think this picture is SO funny.
The person inside of the keytar she is holding, is her son, and future steam boat captain Eliot. To the left is her daughter Isobel, dressed as Jem. Both costumes were made by Carie.
When I look at the pictures of Elliot's costume, I can't help but think of The Evergreen State College mascot, the geoduck:
I didn't end up doing anything for Halloween. I didn't really feel like drinking and partying, which was all that I was aware of in terms of options. I was in the mood to watch to tell scary stories while drinking hot chocolate around a fire, while passing out candy to trick or treaters, or perhaps have a fire with scary stories in the woods.
Since I wasn't able to fulfill that wish, I listened to Npr in my bedroom while making an ink drawing of a deer. Then at midnight left with Kahea for Utah, where I am now, and will remain until Saturday.
When we got into the state, we stopped by Isaac's in Salt Lake, and ended up staying the night because we were pretty sleepy. When I stay the night at Isaac's, I frequently share a bed with him, since his bed is pretty large and has memory foam which is so comfortable. Apparently, last night Isaac had a hard time falling asleep because I kept scatting in my sleep. All night I was singing stuff like 'doo bee bee doo dapaodou-pido'. At one point I woke myself up with my singing, I heard myself singing 'Yaba daba doooooo'. I asked if I had just sung Yaba daba doo, or if I had dreamt it, he confirmed it was real. He said it was pretty annoying and made it difficult to sleep, which is understandable, and I imagine I would have felt the same, but getting to hear about it, and not experience it was very funny. Unfortunately, I can't remember what I was dreaming about that included me scatting.
I think this picture is SO funny.
The person inside of the keytar she is holding, is her son, and future steam boat captain Eliot. To the left is her daughter Isobel, dressed as Jem. Both costumes were made by Carie.
When I look at the pictures of Elliot's costume, I can't help but think of The Evergreen State College mascot, the geoduck:
I didn't end up doing anything for Halloween. I didn't really feel like drinking and partying, which was all that I was aware of in terms of options. I was in the mood to watch to tell scary stories while drinking hot chocolate around a fire, while passing out candy to trick or treaters, or perhaps have a fire with scary stories in the woods.
Since I wasn't able to fulfill that wish, I listened to Npr in my bedroom while making an ink drawing of a deer. Then at midnight left with Kahea for Utah, where I am now, and will remain until Saturday.
When we got into the state, we stopped by Isaac's in Salt Lake, and ended up staying the night because we were pretty sleepy. When I stay the night at Isaac's, I frequently share a bed with him, since his bed is pretty large and has memory foam which is so comfortable. Apparently, last night Isaac had a hard time falling asleep because I kept scatting in my sleep. All night I was singing stuff like 'doo bee bee doo dapaodou-pido'. At one point I woke myself up with my singing, I heard myself singing 'Yaba daba doooooo'. I asked if I had just sung Yaba daba doo, or if I had dreamt it, he confirmed it was real. He said it was pretty annoying and made it difficult to sleep, which is understandable, and I imagine I would have felt the same, but getting to hear about it, and not experience it was very funny. Unfortunately, I can't remember what I was dreaming about that included me scatting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments