Big and Blogger Than Ever

Apparently those old fuddy-duddys in the big white building are taking more notice of blogs these days. Even writing their own! "Blogging is the new talk radio." Does that mean we're also headed for boring extinction? I have also read a few articles recently about lawyers starting their own blogs too. They are trying to term them "blawgs." *groan* And this article also makes up a new word to describe blogs as a media source: blogosphere. Exactly what is wrong with the word "blog" that you have to add -osphere to the end? We don't call it radiosphere, TV-osphere, or earthosphere. The term blogosphere smacks of misunderstanding. Like calling an install a download, or complaining that the Internet is down. Really?? The whole Internet? Quick! Someone call the Pentagon! The Internet is down. *sigh*

Always take the high road

The title of this article alarmed me at first because we all know what religion can do when it goes too far. However, corporations owe their allegiance to the law and the all mighty dollar. Therefore, in order to remain profitable and legal, they must always have some controls and some leniency. So long as their policies are applied consistently, this article makes me feel better. So sure, let the Christians spend their lunch hour praying together, just like the women's group, the softball team, and the young VPs. However I have to draw the line if or when these groups block qualified non-members from advancing in their careers or from getting justice. One hopes that increased understanding will foment increased tolerance, but unfortunately, that's not always the case.

Breathe Like a Fish?

Assuming this is not a hoax (which it could be), it would be quite an achievement if it worked. Even if this inventor is not the one who makes the final product work, his ideas may provide groundbreaking inspiration for others. Articles like this one remind me why it is we can't just raze the whole region to the ground and start over.

Science v. Politics

This started as a comment but as it was growing too long here's your new post.

Dear Jim:

Your argument is flawed. Your first mistake was associating Marx with Soviet Communism - Two very different ideas. Yes, the Soviets claimed to base their ideas off Marx but in practice, they didn't even come close. In a nutshell, Marx theorized that feudal states, driven by economics, grow into capitalist societies. He based this theory off historical accounts of the Dark Ages (feudal states) compared to his political environment (capitalist industrialists of the 1800s). He theorized that those capitalist societies would eventually evolve into communist societies, when the workers realized they were being exploited. He theorized that because the value of an item is the cost of raw materials plus labor plus cost of losses and two of those three factors are fixed, the only way to make profit is to pay laborers less than what they're worth. Eventually the workers catch on and revolt, which may even happen through democratic means.

He thought communism was the future of all capitalist societies. One could almost make an argument that with the advent of the Internet and the increasingly informed public, that revolt has already started across the world. How much of the President's behavior today is his own and how much is in response to public pressure?

However, a communist state as Marx proposed has never been done. It's a little too utopian to work. What Lenin and Stalin created was a dictatorship where they claimed to be helping the people. It is properly called Leninism. What they tried to do - in Marx's terms - was to skip directly from feudalism to communism, which doesn't work. Marx didn't propose Leninism should happen, and he didn't openly support violence.

If you do some research on Stalin, you'll find he grew up in Georgia, which has been a volatile arena since before Stalin. It was ripe for revolution. It's still ripe for revolution today. Stalin had a grudge with the government, he was a psychopath before making himself dictator, and he was very very shrewd. He rose to power by knocking off his competition, and once he got to power, he continued to murder his own people. Yes, during Stalin's reign of terror, millions of citizens died. But it is not attributable to Karl Marx.

Darwin never proposed anything to do with materialism or godlessness. By all accounts, I think Darwin believed in God. What you fail to acknowledge is that Darwin and all other true scientists strive to look at the world objectively. That means you do not allow preconceived notions to dictate your answers. Objectivity is why Lamarck was wrong about giraffes and Darwin was right.

Further, Darwin never proposed "higher" and "lower" animals. Animals are themselves. To call them "higher" or "lower" suggests a non-existent hierarchy of importance - a purely human concept akin to calling a snake evil for eating a mouse or a cat good for looking cute. Animals are a certain way because of the environment in which they became adapted, through purely random means. What worked in that environment was passed on; what didn't died. That is the basis of evolution. It is objective and can be proven through the fossil record and modern day examples.

You can even do experiments to prove it. Take a bacteria strain. Put it in three different petrie dishes with three different conditions (plain, antibiotic A and antibiotic B). Grow it for a few weeks or even months. Your end result will be 3 different bacteria strains, all very similar but one will be resistant to A, one to B, and the other unchanged. Rotate them. You'll develop a bacteria resistant to both antibiotics, because the ones that survive reproduce. The ones that don't, die. They evolve. Right before your eyes!

The concept that one type is "better" than the other is patently false. None of them are better or worse than the others. That is a socialist theory put forth by Herbert Spencer, who bastardized Darwinism by coining the phrase "survival of the fittest." People took that to mean "best" as though evolution is the development of better and better creatures, or progress. That's not the case at all. Darwin simply said that if something can survive to pass on its genes, then its genes will get passed on. If you study insects, you'll see thousands upon thousands of different ways to get food and procreate in a single environment.

In short, Jim - Get a clue pls k thx.

Enlightenment to Dark Ages

If you've read your history or watched a couple Discovery Channel specials, you know that some ancient civilizations believed the earth was round. Yet Christians condemned Copernicus and Galileo for telling them it wasn't flat, like "God" said so. Almost 200 years ago, Charles Darwin stated there was no scientific, rational way that the millions and millions of different species on earth (both past and present) were put here like it says in the Bible. He described a rational way that all these creatures might live on earth and why some of them look similar. His work was concurrently validated by other intelligent minds who came to the same conclusion. Scientists have tried and failed to prove any other intelligent theory to explain how a million creatures and plants with different fossil ages, adaptations, and locations might come to be found. Do proponents of intelligent design (an oxymoron to an extreme) think God just created us a giant treasure hunt to amuse us?

Read the USA Today article, and especially read the results of the survey to the left. What does it tell you that SEVENTY PERCENT of those who believe in a literal translation of the Bible are in the under $20K household income bracket? Not to suggest that poor people are stupid, but it is a reasonable assumption that people with more money get a better education, i.e., better educated people believe in Darwin's theory of evolution. And if this argument's not about religion, then it must be about intelligence, and you know how much I love stupid people!

Lookin for love in all the wrong places

Yea, I ran for president too.

Word of advice: South Carolina's not a good platform for presidency, but they'll pay for your retirement!

Dear God,

Please come down and speak to your wayward followers who take other men's interpretations of your divine will so literally. Explain to them that their forever is your lifetime, and that they and all who go after them will never live long enough to see just one of your days. Tell them you are here and still listening, in your purest form, because they no longer believe in you. They only believe what other men have told them. They have distorted your Word and your Love in their quest for power. Your subtle hints are not loud enough. They no longer remember You.
Amen.

Inspired by a quote from this article:

It is important to many creationists that man and dinosaur lived simultaneously because they believe there was no death in the world until Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden. If the Genesis story is false, they say, then there would be no need for Jesus Christ to redeem the sins of the world.

Thus, at the Museum of Earth History, Genesis dictates gentle, vegetarian dinosaurs sharing Eden with Adam and Eve, whose vaguely Polynesian appearance represents all races, according to a guide. Another exhibit confirms that dinosaurs, like all land creatures created on Day 6, were on Noah's Ark. The exhibit maintains that the ark could accommodate them because it was huge--450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high--and only smaller, adolescent dinosaurs were put on board.

Such literal interpretation is essential, Sharp said, because "if we lose Genesis as a legitimate scientific and historical explanation for man, then we lose the validity of Christianity. Period."

Equalize or die!

I'm glad that someone has finally stepped up to the plate and vilified violence against women throughout the world. "The world will never eliminate poverty until it confronts social, economic and physical discrimination against women," announced the UN. "Inequality is economically inefficient, it is a violation of human rights and it is a hazard to health." Every animal species on the planet recognizes the female's fundamental necessity to the survival of the group except people. While I seriously doubt that any of the perpetrators will read this article, care much, and/or change their ways immediately, recognition often leads to education, and education to change.

And just because I found this picture mind-boggling. The caption says those are LIVE ducks.

OMG, He read a book?

You know, instead of reading about flu outbreaks in Spain, we could have just introduced him to Stephen King. At least he wrote about current day populations in the United States. We already got this one mapped out, big guy.

The New Enemy

They may look innocuous enough, but that tryptophan will kill ya.

But seriously, I recognize that bird flu has become an epidemic in Asia but thus far, only for birds and people who live with them. Do we really have to slaughter millions (yes MILLIONS - over 400,000 in Russia alone) of innocent ducks, geese, chickens, and stray dogs??? Why stray dogs? I have not heard of one case whatsoever where this disease was passed to dogs, cats, or even fleas.

And what do we do next year when the virus is still out there but people are still getting it, because they're still living with chickens? Can we maybe focus on the real, long term problem of poverty - Not just the short term destruction of life? And more importantly, will I have to pay more for my Thanksgiving turkey?

So it begins...

This story explains so much! He's not an idiot at all - He's just ordained by God. However did we doubt you? Perhaps it was the overspending? No, no that can't be it. Your wonderful choices for Court? Maybe. Perhaps your love of science and progress? Have I made my point yet? Unfortunately, there's one thing preventing us from Nixing you, and that's the old axiom that the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know. However dumb the man may be, at least we know his heart's still beating.

Love is letting go

Today I listened to an angry mother berate her child against listening to, learning about, or in any way whatsoever being involved with anything she might consider related to "satanism, goth, or witchcraft." Having researched all three subjects myself, I know them to be mostly harmless in and of themselves. Satanism - the mainstream version - is a joke. Evil is what you make of it. What I consider evil may be very different from what you believe. I define evil as any willful act that intentionally inflicts harm on another when other options are available. Yes, that means I believe in deadly force when bodily harm is imminent and unavoidable. However, hurting someone because it makes you feel better - negatory ghost rider.

Not much can be said for goth these days. You're more likely to run into chivalry. It seems to me that it used to be about being different and unique, but places like Hot Topic have turned into mainstream. Now it just means wearing black and piercing your tongue. Didn't we used to call that "punk"? Or "biker"?

Wicca (witchcraft for those uninitiated) as I understand it, is a benign, spiritual religion. Just because they call their prayers "spells" instead of prayers doesn't make it evil. That is of course, unless you really think God created an entire universe in 7 earth days.

Where you'll find me

Perhaps it wasn't obvious in my first post, but I'm a sucker for the kids' school fundraisers. Cookie dough, girl scout cookies, wrapping paper, you name it. Could be some latent disappointment that I myself was never able to get much doing those, or it could be that I can actually see where the money goes. Those childless people who complain about paying taxes for schools need to open their eyes to who runs their country.

But anyway, fundraisers you say? Yes, fundraisers. About two months ago, I attended an info-session at my office put on by two very nice women from the Lymphoma & Leukemia Society (LLS). And after emotionally scarring me for life with heart wrenching photos and stories of children and friends with leukemia (a deadly form of bone cancer), these women extracted from me a promise to help them in their cause - namely, I volunteered for the Hyde Park version of Light the Night this Saturday.

On that note, this link is a shameless plug for donations. Not only did I sign up, but I signed up AO too. Although he hasn't gotten any donations, he still wants to attend. All in all, I'd say he's pretty a good sport.

Who am I? Why are we here?

Let me begin with a brief introduction. I have started this page at the behest of my significant other after I repeatedly bogarted the comments on his blog to his great annoyance. However, unlike AO, you won't see as many monkeys on my site because we all know that monkeys at keyboards cause typos. Feel free, however, to laugh at the monkey on my shoulder.

I have also begun this website in an attempt to express some of the frustration I feel towards the sheer stupidity I see in the news today and the lack of common sense and common decency portrayed therein. You may consider this a political commentary or a social one. It may vary, and I'm not here to change your mind - just to make you think about it.

I chose the title "Adjusted Reality" after engaging in a few enlightening textual bouts with a classmate over right and wrong. After a point I considered the end of the discussion - and after which I had stopped writing about the dead horse - this classmate's continued posts included jeering comments goading me to continue arguing with him. This experience taught me that it's awfully unfair to argue with someone lacking spellcheck and a high school education. But I digress. Adjusted Reality refers to me adjusting what you may consider "reality", as well as the fact that the way I see the world - as I am coming to learn, much to my chagrin - greatly differs from the mainstream.

Now, a few ground rules and FYIs. What you are about to read (assuming you got this far) may very well piss you off. It may hurt your feelings. And I will not apologize for that. I can only hurt you so far as you let me. If your beliefs are so firm that bending them breaks you, this is not the website for you. You won't like it here. I hope to create a place for free intellectual debate. That means no mud slinging and for the love of Webster, please read what you write so the rest of us can too! If the comment I cannot read, then you must delete!

You will quickly learn that I am a firm believer in equality, common sense, and compassion for others. I have a soft spot for animals and children, and a low tolerance for cruelty. I believe in God as a force in all of us, not as a supreme vengeful being outside of reality. I believe that anyone who badmouths bipartisan politics needs to take an economics course and any history course about dictators. I am heterosexual and I don't believe in making second class citizens based on sexual orientation. I believe that organized religions are good when they help and support people but evil when they use religion as an excuse for political and material actions. I believe everyone has to find God for himself in his own way, and when I use the term "God" I also mean every other term for "God" that man knows (unless specifically stated otherwise).

I think that about covers the basics of who, what, how and why. I don't know the when yet, and you're here so you already know the where. And if you read all the way to the end, congratulations! Consider yourself a well adjusted free thinker.