Apathy

Posted on 2014-03-23 by Patrick
In my two posts on meaning I intentionally left out one more answer, that being it doesn’t matter and it has no baring on my life.  I left this out intentionally as it in fact is a cop out.

To answer in this matter is in fact to lie.  Stating it has no baring on your life, simply is a way of restating that your individual meaning trumps that of the meaning of life.  Those who say this are fall into one of two categories:  The Liar, or The Ignorant.

The Liar simply wishes to deceive you.  They know in fact the emptiness and the shallowness of their claim, they may not want to confront it, they may simply wish to hide their selfishness but it is there and they know it.

The latter category, the ignorant, they are sadly the least likely to acknowledge any of the importance regardless of argument.  Simply put, the ignorant are too benighted to care, nor are they at all deep thinkers.  They may be intelligent, smart individuals, but they are so blinded by their own desires and their own decisions, and to some degree what they have learned, that they refuse to acknowledge any wisdom in the pursuit of this question.  So Apathy has two camps.  Those who know in fact they are not apathetic, but they give the appearance for whatever reason, and those who are but for only one reason blind ignorance.

Again ultimately life has meaning or it does not, this of course means there either is a god or there is not.  There really are only two possibilities.  While the existence of a god cannot be proven, this existence can logically be inferred.  While we may not know the purpose and the meaning of life, we can in fact both infer there must be one by the mere fact we exist.  We can also logically see the need for a purpose regardless of it’s existence.

Without intrinsic purpose, and meaning (and therefore a god) then in fact life is truly meaningless.  This in fact means that anything does go, while we may be able to come to some simple rules to govern society, those rules are fleeting and subject to the times and in fact not eternal.  Look to ancient Germany where the logic was murder was ok because the strongest should do what they want.  Look to today where some people will justify a dog (having already mauled a 4 year old) deserves to live and it’s life is equal to the child.

Apathy is in fact the biggest hoax perpetrated on otherwise well meaning people.  It makes people feel good to know they are not part of what they consider to be foolish.  Yet it is perhaps the single most foolish thought ever planted in the minds of man.  It preys on pride, and it festers.  Continual apathy in fact weakens the capability to reason over time.  The very act of not tackling subjects, especially heavy subjects is not good for the mind.  Like the body, your mind and reasoning capabilities need exercise.  Choosing not to think about it, choosing not to wrestle with deep questions in fact hurts you.

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Apathy

Meaning Part 2: Meaning and Deism

Posted on 2014-03-21 by Patrick
Yesterday
I began a discussion on the philosophy of the great question. Not
the question we are still searching for thanks to Douglas Adams, that
which has an answer of 42, but the question “Does Life Have
Meaning?”.

I
argue that ultimately there are two answers. No, Life has no
intrinsic meaning, that all meaning is derived by the individual, and
Yes, Life does have meaning, though to what end is unknown.

As
I discussed yesterday Materialism, places no direct meaning, no
direct value on life in it of itself. While indeed individual
Materialists can in fact create a value for life, and ascribe that
value above all others the school of thought left by Materialism in
fact does not require this and for that reason we have seen massive
failings due to the teachings of Materialism.

Today
I am exploring the second answer. The Yes answer. As I had stated
yesterday simply saying yes does not mean there is a traditional God
in the sense of YHWH derived from the western religions, just simply
that there must be a creator. Let us call this Deism, as Theism is
largely attributed to the Judeo Christian thinking and in this case
we are examining the mere concept of a creator and not the image of
nor the teachings of that creator.

We
exist, against all odds there does in fact exist life on this planet.
The
laws of thermodynamics states that in much more precise terms
that you cannot create something from nothing. There are those who
will point to the fact we don’t know if the Universe is a Closed or
open system and therefore the laws simply do not apply prior to the
big bang. Yet in spite of the big bang or even our universe as an
open system this in fact does apply. Our understanding is limited
only to that of creation.

Without
an outside source: Matter, Energy, Gravity, Time, even life would not
exist. What exists does so because it in fact was created, not
necessarily in the sense of Intelligent Design, nor in the sense of
biblical creationism, but in the sense that it was set in motion by
something.

In his book Unweaving
the Rainbow Richard Dawkins dissects the views of believers. He
argues that the wonder is not simply in the beauty of the rainbow,
but the beauty of how each facet of the rainbow comes to be. There
are those of the religious persuasion that would argue this dissects
the beauty, yet Dawkins is right. There is beauty in the very
intricacy of the rainbow. Every thing we have come to know about the
Universe, every detail, the ordered process, the fact we can truly
dissect the known universe using mathematics and reason speaks to the
undeniable truth there must be a creator. There are rules that bind
our universe in place, our very existence is only possible because of
our immutable laws of nature.
It brings back the very
point of the why. The question does life have meaning. We can
easily deduce that life, existence, matter, these things were all
created. Even the most staunchest of Materialists cannot in his
heart of hearts deny this simple logic, though they will
unaccountably deny that life itself has meaning beyond their own
given one.

Lets say however that life
does have meaning. We have deduced there is a creator, or a series
of them, but where does this leave us? If life does in fact have
meaning, then life itself is the highest single authority when it
comes to conflicting interests. Even without knowing the meaning or
the purpose of life, we can deduce that since life was created with a
purpose in mind, the value of life is higher than conflicting values
that come down the line.

This of course means that,
Abortion, Suicide, and Murder are both in conflict with the purpose
of creation. Even in situations of extreme pain, or horrible
hardship, the elimination of life is in direct conflict with its
purpose and as the purpose of life is on a higher order we can at a
minimum immediately eliminate the options of Murder, Abortion, and
Suicide as wrong.

What about War? What about
killing in self defense? These are both in conflict with life, so
what about them? In both cases the individual or individuals
involved are faced with the loss of their own life’s purpose, is
their life any more or less valuable than the aggressor? In truth
and in weight of question of course not, their lives would be
considered equal, yet we do not punish the victim who survives nor do
we punish the Warrior. This is because the just warrior, lays down
his life for the sake of others, just as the victim who survives had
her life laid before her by a perpetrator with no respect for life’s
meaning.

The very Simplest of
deductions tells us that life has meaning, because of this we know
there is a creator. The absence of meaning, the absence of a creator
takes us down a road of utter relativism. A world with absolutely no
moral ground work. There is no true universal moral framework that
can be achieved via Materialism.

In recent times there has
been a mantra that religion is the opiate of the masses. There has
been the saying that religion is for the weak, the weak minded and
the weak of heart. In truth however it is the opposite. There will
be no common ground ever found in materialism. Every new discovery,
every new fact drums up a new set of values, a new set of judgments
for us to come to our own individual conclusions and ultimately our
own individual meanings.

We cannot build a society
upon relativism. In such a world what is good for one is not good
for another, in such a society the individual is always what matters
ultimately first. This is not to say that we cannot place value on
an individual. It does say that materialism in its truest sense
leaves no room for anything before the individual, even materialism
curtailed around the edges creates massive swathes of moral gray area
that will bend according to the times rather than bend the times back
to morality.

Intelligent societies if
they desire to thrive must therefore recognize a purpose and creator
if for no other reason than to structure a lasting morality that
transcends time. Without such purpose and creator society begins to devalue the very most basic of things “life” and descends ever
gradually into an abyss of relativism.  Therefore Deism at a minimum is required for a society to exist.  It should come as no small wonder that the founders of the United States with whatever doubts they may have had with Christianity were in fact all Deists.  The very concept of inalienable rights was forged from the premise there is a purpose to life and a creator behind that purpose. 
<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Meaning Part 2: Meaning and Deism

Meaning Part 1: Meaning and Materialism

Posted on 2014-03-21 by Patrick
Does
life have meaning?  This and the follow on question, what is it,
are perhaps two of the oldest questions mankind has faced since we
began to walk the planet.  Well to some in the scientific
community, the argument would be that in fact it would be since our
cerebral thought process began.  Never the less this question
combination is one of the oldest and most valuable questions in terms
of evaluating morality, decision making, and ultimately religious
thought.

The
very concept of meaning, that is a deeper meaning beyond what we
assign to it, involves the belief in something greater than
ourselves.  A god if you will.  This isn’t the Christian,
nor any other modern concept of a god, those concepts will be differentiated with the capital God, or for specifics the names given
throughout religious texts YHWH (pronounced Yahweh).  The god,
the little god if you will, is the very concept of creation without
any story to go along with it.

Over
the coming weeks much of America, and indeed much of the world is
going to be asking the scientific questions about the Universe
through FOX’s reincarnation of the “Cosmos:
A Space Time Odyssey” starring world renowned scientist Dr.
Neil deGrasse Tyson.  These questions of where did we come
from, what else is out there, are we alone, where are we going…
These are all worth while questions, and they should be examined
through both the lens of the scientific mind but also through the
lens of Philosophy and yes even Religion.  

In
our current times there seems to be a misconception that the three of
these schools of thought are in-congruent and have no business being
taught together at all. Some Atheist circles in particular have gone
at great lengths to remove any discussion of religion from schools,
and the public place all together.  This has been a great
disservice, not just to religion, but in fact to the progress of
Science, Philosophy, and human kind at large.

The
disservice can be seen first with the continuing and growing moral
decay within the Western World.  As Religion has slowly died out
in the West, we have seen a rise in crime, in fatherless homes, in a
devaluation of human life.  

From
the Religious side, the removal of Religion from schools and the
public eye has encouraged a very bad belief that Science is
incompatible with Religion.  Many very intelligent, capable
believers feel pushed out of Universities because of the elitist view
that God is dead.  Indeed this has become so true that in just a
week a new movie “God
Is Not Dead” debuts.  The movie discusses this trend
that is harming critical thinkers from a different point of view and
discouraging believers from earning an education that would lead to
making a difference in the world.

There
was a time where the simple question, “Does Life Have Meaning?”
was discussed pondered and thought upon with great depth.  These
days it is usually glossed over not necessarily with the same words
“god is dead”, as Kevin Sorbo’s character puts it in the film, but
often with the same sardonic and condescending overtones. 

Ultimately
there are two answers to the question.  No, the only meaning
life has is what we attribute to it.   Yes life has meaning,
though as to what it is we are left to search for it.  

Now
there are variations to those two answers no doubt.  Many of a
religious persuasion may give an answer specific to their religion.
 Others may try to insert meaning, but ultimately we are left to
search for it.  Amusingly those inserted meanings, even many
with religious overtones or origins fit better into the secular
category of No.

The
Materialists, those who in one way another adhere to the Philosophy
of Materialism (everything is made up of materials and what exists and
is is a bi product of various materials interacting) fall directly
into the first category.  Ultimately there is no god not one,
not many there is simply none.  As such they believe life is
utterly has no meaning, except of course the value they attribute to
it and possibly the value ascribed from society.  This is of
course dangerous.

When
Life has no ascribed meaning it in fact becomes meaningless by
definition.  The value is gone.  We can see this manifest
in a number of ways in the modern world.  Take a look at Belgium
for instance.

Just
recently the people of Belgium allowed children under the age of 18
to make the decision for assisted suicide.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/feb/14/news/la-ol-assisted-suicide-children-belgium-says-yes-20140214
The issues of course were debated over what was humane, arguing that
children should not live in pain and that if the child believes
suicide is the answer then it is right for society to assist in
ending that pain by way of death. It isn’t a decision of malice, it
is in fact a logical
outcome if we superscribe to the theory that the only meaning of life
comes from what we give to it. Of course in Belgium these children
that now have a legal right to suicide do not have a legal right to
vote, they aren’t deemed wise enough to make choices that effect
society (and arguably rightly so), nor are they allowed to drink (for
beer and wine the drinking age is 16, for hard liquor 18).

Then
you have issues like abortion. Yes a very hot button issue, but the
very core of this issue comes down to the question. Does life have
meaning? When the meaning of life is only assigned by the individual
or by society, then other rights trump that of a fetus. The right to
reproduce the way an individual choses, the right to do with one’s
body what one wants to do with one’s body these rights take
precedence over the right of a human being in its most formative
stages. This fundamental transfer of meaning of life and is effects
was perhaps best documented in this video
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/23/msnbc-host-life-begins-when-parents-say-it-does-not-based-on-science/
There has become a part of society that is so vested in this belief
that life’s meaning does not come until the individual can give it
meaning that there are people who argue in favor of the right not
only to abort a baby, but to actually kill a baby outside the womb.
In
fact, last year a fake
petition
was pushed on George Mason University that would legalize “4th
trimester abortions”.
Now the petition was only circulated for an hour (it received 14
signatures) and during that time both students and faculty signed it.

Of
course there are other things that come to play here, and even well
meaning people or people who believe life has meaning will at times
place other priorities above that of the meaning of life (hence the
example of the Christian Feminist)but in the end this is what
materialism boils down to.

Radio
host Dennis Prager has been
talking about this issue now for over 30 years. In this classic
example, he would go to a high school and ask the students a simple
question. “Who would you save from drowning if you could only save
one: your dog, or a stranger?” Overwhelmingly students have been
answering this question by stating they would save the dog, after all
it is their dog, they love their dog. They don’t know or love the
stranger. Here again we can clearly see how the value of life has
lost its meaning, it is now only truly measured by the individual.
This has been going on for 30 years, the children originally saying
this are now the parents but their parents were actually appalled by
this statement for the most part the modern parents are not. Even
this however has begun to degrade bit by bit.

In
Phoenix, Arizona a four year old boy was recently mauled by a pit
bull. People
all over the Internet have come together to support the pit bull and
in fact the dog has a criminal defenses attorney defending its right
to live. Let me state that again. A dog mauled a child, and
people are coming to the defense of the dog not the child. In this
last example the life of a human child (yes the child survived) is
treated with equal value of the dog. 

Materialism ultimately boils down to this, there is no way around it.  While some Materialists will of course come to their own conclusions on that life has meaning, this is an individual impact it is rarely a philosophy that extends beyond that individual and they are an exception not the proven rule.  

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Meaning Part 1: Meaning and Materialism

Practice Lent This Year

Posted on 2014-02-20 by Patrick
Lent is the time period between Ash Wednesday and either
Easter Sunday or Maunday Thursday (Holy Thursday) depending on the Christian
denomination.  For many in the United
States the practice of Lent is thought of mainly as a Catholic practice, in reality
many more do practice it, and theologically speaking there is much to be gained
by those who do regardless of their faith.
Typical practices of Lent include fasting, for many this
means giving up of meat.  This is usually
substituted with fish.  More ardent
Catholics in different parts of the world give up all meat products all
together.  The origins of this tradition
of fasting is steeped in the Gospels, specifically Mark, Luke, and Matthew
regarding the 40
days in which Jesus fasted in the desert prior to his beginning his
ministry.
While some people in the states have come to think of this
practice as a solely a Catholic Phenomenon, it is in fact a Christian one.  The Sundays throughout lent in the Lutheran
Church for instance have specific latin names Invocabit, Reminiscere, Oculi,
Laetare, Judica…  Each Sunday marking
different liturgy that is traditionally read along the way to Easter. 
I bring this up, because I was raised in a dual Religious household.  Technically it was a split household, my
parents divorced while I was very young. 
My mother was a devout Lutheran, my father from a Catholic family (I
spent much of my youth with his Catholic parents).  To say there is an awful lot of anti Catholic
doctrine and bias spread throughout modern Lutheran society and really society
at large is an understatement.
I never attended Catholic Sunday School, or any Catholic
School, but as the years go by I am beginning to understand the need for many
of the Catholic Rites, and traditions.  Much
of this comes from a discussion to be had later on the subject of feeling
comfortable. 
But back to Lent.  Ash
Wednesday will fall on March 5th this year, meaning it is right
around the corner.  I am writing this
small treatise as an argument for those who do not practice it to take a look
at the traditions and seriously consider giving the practice of Lent a chance
in your personal spiritual lives.
Christianity is about the saving of souls.  Christ gives you the parachute to save your
own, and has really only one mission for his followers: the Great
Commission.  Christians are compelled to
go out and spread the word of God to all those they encounter. 
Now this practice in itself does have some worldly
expectations but it does not in fact all fall on Christianity.  Many Christians believe that once you have
accepted Christ into your heart you are saved and all of your sins: past,
present and future are absolved.  This
may be true, but from the objective point of view of a non believer and even
many believers it does not hold water. 
More importantly to those humans around you regardless of your own piety
we all look like hypocrites to those who do not believe.  Hypocrisy is another one of those points that
will need to be discussed at a later time, but to simplify this we must simply
remember that Christians are not to judge those who sin, but to label sin for
what it is.
Once a Christian has committed him or herself to the Lord
they must go out and spread the word. 
That is the one message that is left to the Christian followers.  To do so however they must prepare.  You do not send a Soldier to battle without
preparation.  Like the Soldier the
Christian must prepare, though this preparation is a spiritual one.  To do this Christians must prepare like
Christ did, thus the practice of Lent. 
Fasting of course does little by itself where spiritual care
is concerned.  The next part is prayer
and immersion in the spirit.  The latter
is achieved by reading the Bible and through involvement in a Church
community.  Simply attending a Church is
a start but true immersion is achieved through small groups and thoughtful
discussion.
This brings me back to my childhood.  Growing up in a largely Lutheran home despite
the anti Catholic bias, I was encouraged to practice Lent.  Instead of simply giving up meat my mother
made a different practice for us.  We
were to give up that which was a distraction from God.  Sometimes she would give up Television, other
times it was fast food or Chocolate, every time it was things that had become
more important in her life than was the Lord. 
Lent is the time to focus; it is the time to charge up your spiritual
batteries, it is the time to grow. 
This all comes together by Easter Sunday.  This is the day all Christians recognize
Christ reborn, the day of Salvation.   I
encourage all Christians regardless of faith to partake in the practice of Lent
this year, even if you do not give up meat, take this time to re-focus your
inner spirit and grow in the Lord prior to the day of your Salvation.
Now for the non Christians, the Jews, the Muslims, the
Hindus, the Agnostics, the Atheists, and all others not mentioned.  Lent while it is specifically a Christian
rite, it does not have to be an exclusively Christian practice.  Every New Year 100s of millions of people
take the practice of making resolutions to better themselves, many times these resolutions
fail.  They fail for numerous reasons
sometimes because they are not clear, sometimes because there is not plan,
sometimes because of weak will, and sometimes because a year is a long time.
For you non Christians you are in luck, Lent is merely 40
days (38-44 depending on how you count or practice it).  The short time frame allows you to make that
focus more deep for a shorter period of time. 
More so if you overlook the Christian overtones and think of it in a
lesson of Humanism, this is your opportunity to find what specific selfish
qualities you may have and find ways to elevate your own personal well being
through similar sacrifice towards your fellow man.  If you for instance find that you seek
entertainment you can give up television and devote your time to feeding the
poor.  You can offer your time as a big
brother or sister; you can be an adult and assist those in need.
To say our culture in the United States has taken a turn for
the selfish is a bit of an understatement. 
This is the opportunity for every Citizen around the world to make these
individual sacrifices for a happier healthier society.  Best of all, by doing it now we all grow at the
same time, it isn’t the time for just Christian growth it is the time for
everybody to grow and develop together.  

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Practice Lent This Year

President’s Day

Posted on 2014-02-19 by Patrick
Monday was President’s Day, a holiday that I for the most part ignore.  In my youth we celebrated Washington’s and Lincoln’s Birthdays.  In 1971 Congress passed the Uniform Monday act, which would merge these two holidays and create three and four day weekends for Federal Employees.

Now as I stated we celebrated Washington’s and Lincoln’s Birthdays when I was growing up.  I wasn’t born until 1979, meaning that despite this silly act from Congress at least some States and school districts understood the absurdity of President’s Day.

Are we to celebrate Presidents as foul and disruptive as President Andrew Johnson, the first President to be impeached?  What of Presidents who seem utterly ineffectual, or even worse detrimental to the long term efficacy of the United States, Presidents like Woodrow Wilson for instance.

There are a great many that have simply been forgotten and yet we celebrate them all, not just the great ones, all of them.

Even then we forget the Presidents who predated George Washington.  Oh yes we had them by the way.

The elected Presidents Of the Continental Congress were:

  1. John Hanson 1782
  2. Elias Boudinot 1783
  3. Thomas Mifflin 1784
  4. Richard Henry Lee 1785
  5. John Hancock 1786
  6. Nathan Gorman 1787
  7. Arthur St. Clair 1788
  8. Cyrus Griffin 1789
All predated President George Washington.  

These however were the first elected Presidents of the United States, two Presidents preceded them.  Samuel Huntington and Thomas Mckean.   

The Continental Congress had preexisted prior to the Revolutionary war, but since the Articles of Confederation were not yet drafted the title of President of Congress did not mean the leader of the then 13 Colonies, to be later changed to the 13 States under the Constitution.

Samuel Huntington was in fact the last President of the Continental Congress, during his tenure the Articles of Confederation were ratified making him the first Official President of the Confederated States.  His predecessor, John Jay, is arguably one of the most influential founders of our nation and the Constitution that would later replace the Articles of Confederation.  Jay, along with Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison penned the greatest arguments to drop the Confederation in favor of a more perfect Union with the drafting of the Federalist Papers (everybody who thinks they have an educated opinion on how the United States should run should read this document).

Thomas Mckean was elected among his peers to replace President Huntington when the late President was forced to resign due to health reasons.  

When President Mckean’s term was up the electoral process for the President began, thus bringing President Hanson and the 7 who followed him prior to President George Washington. 





<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on President’s Day

Super Shark

Posted on 2014-02-02 by Patrick
My lovely wife has been gone visiting my family for the past three weeks so it has given me a fair amount of time to waste.  And waste it I certainly have.

This week I have watched two movies that I knew would be a waste of my time, but I figured hey they are on cable and it makes for good background noise.  The first was Two Headed Shark Attack.  I thought for sure this had to be the single most stupid movie I had ever seen.  So stupid that it made Monos Hands of Fate look like Oscar material.  
Today however I upped the anti and watched Super Shark.  Let me be frank, not only was this movie absolutely ridiculously stupid but it was clearly the work of somebody with no knowledge of just about anything portrayed in the movie.  
The plot for instance reads like something of a fifth grader, with a vague knowledge of the BP oil spill of 2009.  Apparently the writers speculated that a weathering agent used for the purposes of drilling allowed a prehistoric shark to be removed from suspended animation where it could then wreak havok on everything in its path.
Apparently the shark which lives under water has the ability to disrupt radio waves above water, ok sure possibly I guess but rather unlikely.  Then again we are talking about a prehistoric shark related to the Megaladon that is roaming the oceans now clearly “unlikely” isn’t something the writers were concerned with.  Of course they upped the anti on the unlikely category by introducing the super shark’s next ability, that of crawling around on land.  Of course land walking isn’t enough, the shark could also apparently fly like a glider plane upon bursting from the water as well.  
My favorite part came however when the military was introduced to the film.  A Captain in the Army was put in charge of the mission to destroy the shark.  Ok sure this is believable, one creature small unit, this part makes sense.  Then you get a good look at the Captain’s uniform, he is quite clearly the Captain at an ROTC unit.  As an ROTC captain he would be instructing students in a class room and about as far removed from a combat role as you could be.
What made me laugh even more however was at a meeting to discuss how to destroy the super shark the Captain mentions they have a secret weapon.  This secret weapon is about as laughable as the super shark is all together.  It is a tank, except that it moves around like a freaking Star Wars ATAT the damn thing had legs and looked like a tortured animal.  Supposedly it was designed to traverse any terrain in Afghanistan.
It was quite clear the writers and the director have never worked with the military, nor consulted anybody from the military before even working on the movie.  Let me be clear I am not a tanker, but I was assigned to a tank company in the Army for over 2 and a half years.  I have spent some time on tanks, this made little sense.  First of all it was manned by one person.  A tank requires really a minimum of two, one to drive and one to load.  Most U.S. tanks have a driver, a loader, a gunner, and a tank commander.  But lets just say we have John Rambo driving this one man tank, lets go to issue number two.  The freaking tank had legs.  A tank ways over 70 tons, that is 140,000 pounds of metal.  It takes enough fuel to power the jet engine and move this thing around on tracks already but freaking legs.  Then you have to consider the balance issue of having a walking 140,000 pound monstrosity.  Oh did I mention this monstrosity was walking on a sandy beach.  A real tank would have been far more useful.  Then again a real tank would have been far more useful in Afghanistan compared to this freak show creation. 
Of course then the shark comes on land to combat the tank, a tank without the ability to traverse itself.  Instead this impotent creation is forced to hobble around like a drunken toddler that just learned to walk.  It meanders around the beach incapable of doing anything.  It was as if the concept of a turret had never occurred to the writers.  
Then again this was written by people who were quite obviously obsessed with making the oil industry look like an evil empire.  From my experience with the crazy leftists they also have no love of the military and they most certainly wouldn’t have bothered to consult with them.
I did manage to watch it all the way through.  But this was only in the interest of seeing just how stupid the movie could get.  Don’t waste your time, I did it for you.  This movie was nothing but thinly veiled propaganda and quite poorly at that.  
<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Super Shark

In Honor of Dr. King

Posted on 2014-01-20 by Patrick

Dr. King was a very wise and great man.  In honor of Mr. King I post the following video from youtube.

The impact of his words  have lasted more than a generation, his dream from the I have a Dream Speech largely has been achieved.  Governmental institutionalized racism has been effectively eradicated. 

A great man, an honorable man, a man to be recognized for his good works.

Dr. King, we honor you.

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on In Honor of Dr. King

Bing The Search Engine You Probably Aren’t Using

Posted on 2014-01-16 by Patrick
Microsoft’s Bing is the default search engine for many computers, no surprise as Microsoft Windows is the default Operating System on most computers.  This however is not from my experience the default browser people choose to use.

I read several techie blogs and I’m unsure of where I learned some of these facts, but there are reasons to use various search engines:  Google, Yahoo, Bing, Duck Duck Go.  Up until very recently I was an all Google type of guy, but I’ve been experimenting with some searches and found a  very good reason to use some of the others.

Microsoft Bing for instance is incredibly useful.  While Google has an excellent search algorithm to figure out where that photo you have came from or even to find photos that meet your needs these searches are somewhat limited and obtuse.  Say you wanted to look for an open source or a free to use and modify photo via google,

In this case we will look up a Chess Photo via google.  Google requires you to click search tools and then click  usage rights.  Bing has this available as a search filter immediately available.  If you scroll down far enough on Bing you will see my banner photo, well before it was cropped and flipped around to my liking.

What I’m getting at is that Bing makes looking for open source and public domain photos a lot easier to find and use.  Of course there are draw backs to using Bing.  If you value your privacy Bing is not the way to go, they store your ip and search data for 36 months.  Google will store your information for 9 months, and Yahoo stores it for only 90 days.

There are good reasons to stick with any one of these search engines, but perhaps it is best to use a blend of them to better suit your needs.

<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Bing The Search Engine You Probably Aren’t Using

The Princess Bride Barb

Posted on 2014-01-16 by Patrick
I absolutely love how Social media has produced meme after meme.  Some of which are amusing others not so much.  Trending on Facebook right now is perhaps one of the most amusing and cutting barbs I’ve seen in a while.

I just how love how useful applicable The Princess Bride can be 🙂
<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on The Princess Bride Barb

Best Buy Insurance and Google Voice To the Rescue

Posted on 2014-01-15 by Patrick
On Sunday I was charging my cell phone while driving to get a hair cut.  As I pulled into the strip mall parking lot I began to smell the acrid odor of burning plastic.  I looked down and saw smoke spewing from the side of my Motorola Razr HD cell phone.

I immediately unplugged my phone, the usb micro cable was charred you could see the smoke continue to pour out from the charging port.  Thankfully the burning stopped when the supply of power was removed.  Sadly the components were so burned that a recharge would not be possible.
This was problematic.  I was on vacation in Minnesota, and it was my last day in town.  The following evening I was supposed to be picked up by a co-worker from the airport, except I hadn’t given him my flight information yet.
Here is the good news.  I have a Google Voice account.  When I got back to where I was staying I was able to log into my Google Account pull up my co-worker’s phone number and text him directly via Google Voice.  It worked just like it had been my cell, and we were able to coordinate effortlessly.
When I got home I lucked out again.  My wife and I keep her old cell phone in the house, it is a perfect back up phone for instances like this.  This morning I logged into my cell provider ported my service to the backup phone.  Then when I got home from work I headed over to Best Buy.
I have had insurance through AT&T and Verizion in the past, and I’ve had to use their service.  It was very frustrating having to spend an additional $50 to get my phone replaced.  This time however it was easy.  Best Buy insurance doesn’t cost anything beyond the standard payment mine is $10 per month.  
I have seen arguments against insuring your electronics but they never really made sense to me.  As it turns out I have used the Best Buy insurance twice in less than six months, three times in the last year.  My wife’s phone needed replacement last winter, then in September my cell phone was bent almost in half, and now of course the cell phone burning up.  Needless to say insurance is clearly imperative.  
I have been heavily devoted to working into the cloud.  I love Amazon, I love Kobo, I love my nook, drop box, Google Web Services…I have been devoted to working into the world of the cloud business.  My experience working with Best Buy and the Geek Squad has made me begin to rethink some of this.  There is something to be said for quality service and insurance from the big box store.  To that end as long as Best Buy is providing quality products and service they will be my source of future phones at a minimum.
<span class="entry-utility-prep entry-utility-prep-cat-links">Posted in</span> Uncategorized | Comments Off on Best Buy Insurance and Google Voice To the Rescue